Enforcement question

[Atlanta Blue]

'Bout time you came around AB....but call the "non-PSK" fouls "post-possession fouls"

I didn't "come around", I've been there all the time.  But I thought Bwest brought up a good point: if "post scrimmage kick" fouls means those specific fouls with PSK enforcement, then 10-2-3 can't apply and everything offsets.

But I don't think that what the rule means.  I think "post scrimmage kick fouls" include all those fouls that came after the kick, which would include those after the COP.

[Bwest]

I didn't "come around", I've been there all the time.  But I thought Bwest brought up a good point: if "post scrimmage kick" fouls means those specific fouls with PSK enforcement, then 10-2-3 can't apply and everything offsets.

But I don't think that what the rule means.  I think "post scrimmage kick fouls" include all those fouls that came after the kick, which would include those after the COP.

To muddy things up a bit: I originally came up with this question after reading through the NCAA rules. I know this isn't the NCAA forum, but it is my understanding that the PSK rules in the Fed were derived from the NCAA rules.

The NCAA rule is the following:

Offsetting Fouls
ARTICLE 4. If live-ball fouls by both teams are reported to the referee, the
fouls offset and the down is repeated (A.R. 10-1-4-I and VIII). Any player who
commits a foul that mandates disqualification must leave the game.
Exceptions:
1. When there is a change of team possession during a down, and the team
last gaining possession had not fouled before last gaining possession,
it may refuse offsetting fouls and thereby retain possession after
completion of the penalty for its foul (A.R. 10-1-4-II-VII).
2. When all Team B fouls are governed by postscrimmage kick rules,
Team B may refuse offsetting fouls and accept postscrimmage kick
enforcement.
3. Rules 8-3-4-c and 3-1-3-g-3 (during a try or extra period after Team B
possession).

With that wording it seems even MORE clear that the fouls should offset. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find an interpretation there either.

[Ralph Damren]

IMHO.....
  NFHS PSK was NOT copied verbatim from NCAA - Rarely will anything be copied verbatim from NCAA
(see NFHS POed  @ NCAA per 1948 in another topic).
  True PSK (2-16-2h4) occurs before end of kick.
  It appears both codes allow R to keep the ball by declining K's foul, if R's foul(s) were under PSK or after COP.
  It appears that the Braves knocked the Sox around yesterday - AB, glad it was just for fun .

In theory, the "clean hands" concept would apply to both R fouls as PSK implies that R has got the ball with clean hands.

[Atlanta Blue]

  It appears both codes allow R to keep the ball by declining K's foul, if R's foul(s) were under PSK or after COP.

I theory, I agree, but where does it say that?

[Ralph Damren]

I theory, I agree, but where does it say that?

Agree that the wording is not clear as to "post scrimmage kick" is referring to "PSK" or stuff happening after kick is fielded.

In 1970, the "clean hands policy" for double fouls during a down in which change of possession occurs was adopted.

In 2003, the "PSK" enforcement provided that a change of possession had occurred when the ball was kicked.

In 2015, the OP presented a play where 2 fouls on R occurred that fell under the above mentioned "clean hands policy" .

Your Honor, I rest my case...........

[Atlanta Blue]

In 2003, the "PSK" enforcement provided that a change of possession had occurred when the ball was kicked.

No, no, a thousand times no!

Change of possession doesn't change until R possesses the ball.  However, there is a "special enforcement" of fouls that occur between the snap (which is before the ball is kicked) and the time the kick ends, given other criteria that must happen as well.

That's a far cry from "possession changes when the ball is kicked".  Even the NCAA and NFL, which take an even more liberal attitude on this, don't consider it to have "changed" until the kick crosses the LOS, not from the time it was kicked.  If possession changed at the time the ball was kicked, then a blocked punt (that never crossed the LOS) picked up by K would be a first down for K without them having to reach the LTG, and that's certainly not true or desired.

To clean things up, 10-2-3 should be edited to read:

If each team fouls during a down in which there is a change of possession and all R fouls are post-scrimmage kick fouls or occur after the kick ends, then R may retain the ball ......

We don't need a rule change, just an editorial change.

[Ralph Damren]

Sometimes , like the NFHS Rules Book, I don't talk/write/think clearly . I shoulda' said : "Under PSK, the 'clean hands policy' would apply". Your editorial change would certainly clarify, please remind me next Fall and I'll submit it as such.

Sometimes, on vague situations such as this, common sense could prevail.....The rationale of the "Clean hands policy" is that you got possession of the ball without fouling and shouldn't have to give it up (Fundamental I-6 :No foul causes loss of the ball). Both of R's fouls in the OP would qualify via clean hands so R could keep the ball by declining K's foul.

We shouldn't be too quick in assuming that R will want to keep the ball in the OP as the result would be equivalent to a 55 yard punt - a boomer for most HS kickers. Coaches (& those that like to play coach), what would your (R's ) choice be ?

[CEngel]

I think the difference in terminology is irrelevant in this case most likely.  In this particular case, you had a 45 yard punt, with a possible PSK enforcement.  This moves the ball half the distance to the goal line or the 10 yard line.  I don't know of many coaches that will want to decline the illegal formation and take the ball that deep on their side of the field.  I would guess, the penalty would be accepted, thus setting up a double foul situation and the down would get replayed.

[Ralph Damren]

Agreed, CEngel, the OP had it 4th & 10 so replaying the down would, IMHO, be R's best choice. I can't ever recall B choosing to offset the penalties on COP via fumble recovery or interception, however.

[Atlanta Blue]

There are some circumstances where I could see declining K's foul and taking the ball at the 10.  Suppose there was less than a minute in the game,and as R, I'm down by 2.  If R were tackled inbounds, isn't the clock going to start on the RFP if we replay the down?  In that case, K can run off another 25 seconds.  If I'm R's coach with a good offense, the time may be more important than the yards.

But regardless of whether I would accept or decline IN THIS CASE, the wording of the rule needs tweaking to assure the choices that we think exist for R actually do.  The "clean hands" philosophy says R should get their choice, logic leads us to that conclusion, but it isn't actually what the rule says at this point, as BWest as pointed out.

[Ralph Damren]

Good point,AB, on the timing situation. A scrimmage kick had been made but a new series hadn't been established, so crank 'er on RFP. A situation where B would want to offset the penalties and replay the down on a COP could occur on an interception/fumble recovery  where B fouls in their own end zone after COP. Replaying the down would probably be more attractive than giving up a safety and free kicking.

That's all my knowledge for now, have a good weekend, everyone/y'all....enjoy March Madness (I was 12-4 yesterday, with Duke to win it all), while I enjoy watching the snow melt.