RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: Andrew McCarthy on February 23, 2012, 12:12:52 PM
-
Discussion on this play was a victim of the server crash so let's try this again...
Third and 6 on B's 20. Both teams are out of timeouts. A33 is close to a first down near B's 14. Immediately after the ball is dead, A76 blocks late and is flagged. The foul occurs before a timeout signal for a measurement. The clock shows 0:09 in the first half. The ball is spotted one inch short of a first down.
We seemed to agree that there would be a 10-second subtraction and the half was over.
Please provide your rationale with rules references for enforcing (or not enforcing) the 15-yard penalty on the 2nd half kickoff.
-
This hinges on the definition of the succeeding spot, and I think it says that the penalty will not carry over.
2-25-3 says that the succeeding spot is the point at which the ball is next to be put in play. In this case it would be at about B-14, as there is still time on the game clock. Thus, the penalty is enforced from there and the ZAP-10 causes the half to end.
-
I'd agree with Kalle. As noted the clock has stopped for a measurement and the penalty will be enforced at the subsequent spot, and since team A would still have possession (4th down) the 10-second runoff is an included component of the penalty enforcement. The half ends after the enforcement so nothing to carryover to the 2nd half.
-
How is there a runoff? Which of the 5 parts of the rule -- even when not limited to specifics -- has there been an infraction of?
There's no carryover anyway. The penalty has been completed when accepted, and it has to be accepted to have the time run off. There's nothing to carry over. Just because the ball hasn't been put into play doesn't mean there hasn't been a yardage mark off.
-
The foul occured prior to the clock being stopped for a measurement. Therefore Team A committed a foul which caused the clock to stop and thus is subject to the runoff.
-
Nobody wants this carried over? Anyone? Anyone?
-
Nobody wants this carried over? Anyone? Anyone?
Bueller says:
You may not want it, but it would.
From the 10-Second Subtraction Bulletin by RR of 8/11/11:
19. Second and 5 at the B-30. Ball carrier A22 is tackled at the B-28 for a two-yard gain. A few seconds after the ball is dead A78 commits a personal foul or a foul for unsportsmanlike conduct. When the officials flag this foul and stop the game clock, there are 7 seconds left.
RULING: The dead-ball foul by A78 causes the clock to stop and the 10-second subtraction applies. The game is over.
NOTE: If this happens in the second quarter the penalty will be enforced at the start of the second half.
-
So in effect the penalty is actually enforced twice? The offended team has to elect to have the 15 yard penalty yardage enforced to qualify for the ten second subtraction, which then results in the half ending, but then we are to enforce the penalty a second time to open the 2nd half?
-
So in effect the penalty is actually enforced twice? The offended team has to elect to have the 15 yard penalty yardage enforced to qualify for the ten second subtraction, which then results in the half ending, but then we are to enforce the penalty a second time to open the 2nd half?
However you look at it, the DISTANCE penalty is enforced on the 3rd period kickoff.
-
Doesn't that at least appear to directly conflict with the language in Rule 10 regarding penalty enforcement, when a penalty is completed, and interval fouls?
-
Before we get carried away and start enforcing the yardage on second half kickoffs for all DB fouls (false start, DOG, etc.) that end up in a similar timing situation, be sure to read the entire bulletin. This is clearly a "by interpretation" situation. RR (and rules committee, I presume) do not want dead ball PF's and USC's to go unenforced if the game is at a point where it is not over - in other words, there exists a succeeding spot where we can penalize from. There is no rule book support for this but I do agree with the philosophy. When you read the bulletin you will not find similar notes attached to plays where the clock was stopped because of a false start, defense offside, delay of game, sub violation or incomplete illegal forward pass.
-
But again, given this case play, isn't the specific reason that the half is over that the PF penalty has been completed and actually enforced?
-
Before we get carried away and start enforcing the yardage on second half kickoffs for all DB fouls (false start, DOG, etc.) that end up in a similar timing situation, be sure to read the entire bulletin. This is clearly a "by interpretation" situation. RR (and rules committee, I presume) do not want dead ball PF's and USC's to go unenforced if the game is at a point where it is not over - in other words, there exists a succeeding spot where we can penalize from. There is no rule book support for this but I do agree with the philosophy. When you read the bulletin you will not find similar notes attached to plays where the clock was stopped because of a false start, defense offside, delay of game, sub violation or incomplete illegal forward pass.
No one is carried away. Indeed, 'carry over' only applies to personal fouls and unsportsmanlike conduct fouls - always has, and for the reason you stated. It looked like some were trying to ignore the distance penalty, after the 10-second subtraction, which, for a personal foul, would be incorrect.
-
You just need to think that the clock change happens before the distance penalty is enforced, which then does change the succeeding spot to the second half kickoff.
-
But again, given this case play, isn't the specific reason that the half is over that the PF penalty has been completed and actually enforced?
Yes, and no. The half is over because the 10-second subtraction provision leaves no time on the clock. RR interprets the subtraction as, effectively, meaning the foul occured after time had expired. Thus, the half is over, but the distance component can be enforced on the 3rd period kickoff.
-
Doesn't that at least appear to directly conflict with the language in Rule 10 regarding penalty enforcement, when a penalty is completed, and interval fouls?
Think of it this way.
1. The penalty is accepted.
2. 10 seconds are run off
3. Then the yardage is marked off
Just so happens to be a 20 min break between steps 2 & 3.
-
Think of it this way.
1. The penalty is accepted.
2. 10 seconds are run off
3. Then the yardage is marked off
Just so happens to be a 20 min break between steps 2 & 3.
Let's play devil's advocate. Reverse steps #2 and #3 and it appears like double jeopardy to me.
-
Let's play devil's advocate. Reverse steps #2 and #3 and it appears like double jeopardy to me.
Huh?
If the distance penalty and the 10-second subtraction are accepted, that means either the distance penalty will be enforced immediately and another down played (because there is time remaining in the period), or the distance penalty will be enforced at the 3rd period kickoff because there is no time remaining in the second period. What double jeopardy in either case?
-
The half is ONLY OVER if the penalty is accepted and enforced which by rule is 15 yards and the optional 10 second subtraction. The rules are VERY CLEAR they are not separable options unless the offended team wants to accept the yardage penalty and then decline the 10 second subtraction. The idea that a team can accept the penalty yardage, then also accept the optional 10 second subtraction that effectively ends the half and by rule completes the penalty, then additionally somehow also get the 15 yards carried over in my opinion is in direct conflict with the clear wording in rule 10.
I would suggest that if the rules intend that we carry over an enforced PF penalty to the 2nd half, after it was a prior enforcement of that same penalty that caused the half to end, then they need to say that. Right now they say that is not the case.
-
The half is ONLY OVER if the penalty is accepted and enforced which by rule is 15 yards and the optional 10 second subtraction. The rules are VERY CLEAR they are not separable options unless the offended team wants to accept the yardage penalty and then decline the 10 second subtraction. The idea that a team can accept the penalty yardage, then also accept the optional 10 second subtraction that effectively ends the half and by rule completes the penalty, then additionally somehow also get the 15 yards carried over in my opinion is in direct conflict with the clear wording in rule 10.
I would suggest that if the rules intend that we carry over an enforced PF penalty to the 2nd half, after it was a prior enforcement of that same penalty that caused the half to end, then they need to say that. Right now they say that is not the case.
Completing a penalty and enforcing a penalty are two different things. Completion of the penalty precedes enforcement. The penalty can be completed before half-time, then enforced after half-time. As RR interprets, when a 10-second subtraction ends the second period, effectively, the foul occurred after time expired. No different than if you have a late hit after the ball becomes dead and the clock expired (literally) during the play. The penalty will be enforced at the 3rd period kickoff.
There is no more explanation that can be given. And it is the correct and official procedure. So, Bueller, start the music.... well shake it up baby, now (shake it up baby) - Twist and Shout (twist and shout)....
-
If the distance penalty and the 10-second subtraction are accepted, that means either the distance penalty will be enforced immediately and another down played (because there is time remaining in the period), or the distance penalty will be enforced at the 3rd period kickoff because there is no time remaining in the second period. What double jeopardy in either case?
I think you missed his point. Foul occurs after the play with 9 seconds left. Penalty accepted. There are two ways it could be enforced:
1. Subtract 10 seconds, half over, yardage on the next period.
2. Mark the yardage, NOW subtract 10 seconds, which ends the half, and the penalty was already enforced, nothing to carry over.
Nowhere in the book or mechanics does it say you subtact the 10 seconds FIRST, and then mark off yardage. Why isn't the second method above just as valid?
I know, the short answer is because there is a play in the bulletin that says so, but it APPEARS to only apply to PFs and USCs, not to all penalties. And if so, then there appears to be some inconsistency in the enforcement.
-
I think you missed his point. Foul occurs after the play with 9 seconds left. Penalty accepted. There are two ways it could be enforced:
1. Subtract 10 seconds, half over, yardage on the next period.
2. Mark the yardage, NOW subtract 10 seconds, which ends the half, and the penalty was already enforced, nothing to carry over.
Nowhere in the book or mechanics does it say you subtact the 10 seconds FIRST, and then mark off yardage. Why isn't the second method above just as valid?
I know, the short answer is because there is a play in the bulletin that says so, but it APPEARS to only apply to PFs and USCs, not to all penalties. And if so, then there appears to be some inconsistency in the enforcement.
Not sure why anybody thinks the distance penalty and the 10-second subtraction are sequential, either way. They are accepted coincidentally (if they are both accepted). The distance penalty is enforced at the succeeding spot. If the 10-second subtraction happens to terminate the second period, then the distance penalty (personal fouls and sportsmanlike conduct fouls) is enforced at the 3rd period kickoff. Not inconsistent at all.
-
Not sure why anybody thinks the distance penalty and the 10-second subtraction are sequential, either way. They are accepted coincidentally (if they are both accepted). The distance penalty is enforced at the succeeding spot. If the 10-second subtraction happens to terminate the second period, then the distance penalty (personal fouls and sportsmanlike conduct fouls) is enforced at the 3rd period kickoff. Not inconsistent at all.
Just a clarification on the excellent point provided above:
Succeeding Spot
ARTICLE 3. The succeeding spot is the point at which the ball is next to be put in play.
Because of the zap 10 there is no spot at which the ball is next to be put in play in the 1st half; so the succeeding spot becomes 2nd half kickoff spot where the ball will next be put into play.
-
he foul occured prior to the clock being stopped for a measurement. Therefore Team A committed a foul which caused the clock to stop and thus is subject to the runoff.
Please provide rules support for this. Your statement here is NOT the standard.
The clock would have stopped anyway under this scenario, so the foul didn't cause the clock to stop. Even if it did, the intent of the rule isn't to cover all fouls -- all fouls will stop the clock.
The rule reads:
ARTICLE 4. a. With the game clock running and less than one minute remaining in either half, if a player of either team commits a foul that causes the clock to stop, the officials may subtract 10 seconds from the game clock at the option of the offended team. The fouls that fall in this category include but are not limited to:
1. Any foul that prevents the snap (e.g., false start, encroachment, defensive offside by contact in the neutral zone, etc.);;
2. Intentional grounding to stop the clock;;
3. Incomplete illegal forward pass;;
4. Backward pass thrown out of bounds to stop the clock;;
5. Any other foul committed with the intent of stopping the clock.
The offended team may accept the yardage penalty and decline the 10-second subtraction. If the yardage penalty is declined the 10-second subtraction is declined by rule.
b. The 10-second rule does not apply if the game clock is not running when the foul occurs or if the foul does not cause the game clock to stop (e.g., illegal formation).
c. After the penalty is administered, if there is a 10-second subtraction, the game clock starts on the referee’s signal. If there is no 10-second subtraction, the game clock starts on the snap. d. If the fouling team has a timeout remaining they may avoid the 10-second subtraction by using a timeout. In this case the game clock starts on the snap after the timeout.
All of the fouls listed, though not an exhaustive list, make it clear that either the intent of the team/player is to do something to stop the clock (or keep it from starting) OR do something like throw an incomplete pass they know would stop the clock anyway. Rule 9 fouls don't really fall under this. The "not limited to" language" is there simply to cover issues that are unforeseen by the committee.
-
The clock would have stopped anyway under this scenario, so the foul didn't cause the clock to stop. Even if it did, the intent of the rule isn't to cover all fouls -- all fouls will stop the clock.
What?
A. Why would the clock have stopped "...anyway...?" If you mean that the Referee would have stopped the clock for a measurement, that would have happened only if nothing else happened to stop the clock. In the play under discussion, the foul occurred before a possible measurement became an issue. The foul caused the clock to stop. Period. Had the call for the measurement come before the foul, then, no - the 10SS would not apply. But, if you have a foul AFTER a call for a measurement, it ain't gonna be a simple late block, as in the given play. That will more likely be a shove, a strike, or a UNS.
B. The very example provided from the 10-second subtraction bulletin unequivocally tells us that ANY foul can qualify to invoke the 10-second subtraction when the foul is committed when the ball is dead and the clock is running.
-
B. The very example provided from the 10-second subtraction bulletin unequivocally tells us that ANY foul can qualify to invoke the 10-second subtraction when the foul is committed when the ball is dead and the clock is running.
I think there should be an editorial change from "with the intent of stopping the clock" to "causing the clock to stop." Then the bulletin would be in line with the rule language.
-
I think there should be an editorial change from "with the intent of stopping the clock" to "causing the clock to stop." Then the bulletin would be in line with the rule language.
Concur. Fortunately, the bulletins make it clear what we are to do.
-
With that, the following play should be a breeze...
PLAY 2: Second and 7 on B's 20. Neither team has timeouts remaining. A88 is tackled near B's 13. A few seconds after the ball is dead, A78 commits a personal foul. When the officials flag this foul and stop the game clock, the game clock shows 0:07 in the second quarter. A measurement shows that Team A made a first down by one inch.
-
With that, the following play should be a breeze...
PLAY 2: Second and 7 on B's 20. Neither team has timeouts remaining. A88 is tackled near B's 13. A few seconds after the ball is dead, A78 commits a personal foul. When the officials flag this foul and stop the game clock, the game clock shows 0:07 in the second quarter. A measurement shows that Team A made a first down by one inch.
Anyone? Anyone?
-
Why not. Clock stopped to award team A a first down. The 10-second subtraction therefore does not apply. Enforce the 15 yard PF on A, 1st & 10 A at the 28, and wind the game clock on the RFP.