Another Question on Extend the game or not?

[juxone]

This question is not unlike an earlier question but there's a small difference.. And reading the rule book

A is slightly behind (4 points) under pressure the quarterback drops back to throw a pass, unable to find an open receiver he begins to run but passes from the B3. LOS was B7 (it was third and goal). The fullback A55 catches the pass in the end zone as the clock goes to 0 for the 4th period. Since there is an illegal pass and illegal touching by an ineligible .. wouldn't the game be over (no untimed down)? The illegal forward pass is a loss of down penalty as does illegal touching by an ineligible.

[CalhounLJ]

This question is not unlike an earlier question but there's a small difference.. And reading the rule book

A is slightly behind (4 points) under pressure the quarterback drops back to throw a pass, unable to find an open receiver he begins to run but passes from the B3. LOS was B7 (it was third and goal). The fullback A55 catches the pass in the end zone as the clock goes to 0 for the 4th period. Since there is an illegal pass and illegal touching by an ineligible .. wouldn't the game be over (no untimed down)? The illegal forward pass is a loss of down penalty as does illegal touching by an ineligible.

The game would be over with either one. Doesn’t have to be both. In fact, B couldn’t take both if they wanted to. I’m assuming you’re trying to say that because there were two LOD penalties and it was 3rd down, A would lose two downs? If so, that’s not how it works. The fact that there was a foul on the last play of the game where time ran out during the play, and the foul carries a LOD provision dictates no replay with untimed down, no matter what down it is.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[NVFOA_Ump]

Rule reference is:

Rule 3, Section 3, Article 4:  . . . A period shall not be extended by an untimed down if one of the following occurred during a down in which time expires:
b. There was a foul by either team and the penalty is accepted for:
1. unsportsmanlike fouls,
2. nonplayer fouls,
3. fouls that specify a loss of down,

In this case play the penalty would be accepted erasing the TD (the result of the play) and the game would be over since the period " .... shall not be extended....."

[juxone]

The game would be over with either one. Doesn’t have to be both. In fact, B couldn’t take both if they wanted to. I’m assuming you’re trying to say that because there were two LOD penalties and it was 3rd down, A would lose two downs? If so, that’s not how it works. The fact that there was a foul on the last play of the game where time ran out during the play, and the foul carries a LOD provision dictates no replay with untimed down, no matter what down it is.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I’m assuming you’re trying to say that because there were two LOD penalties and it was 3rd down, A would lose two downs?  No sir, I was just confirming that since time had expired that any penalty with a loss of down even if it had been 1st 2nd or 3 or 4th down--regardless of how many other fouls, in the live ball play occurred, the game would, in fact, be over and there would be no untimed down. But I do appreciate the added discussion.

[bossman72]

I’m assuming you’re trying to say that because there were two LOD penalties and it was 3rd down, A would lose two downs?  No sir, I was just confirming that since time had expired that any penalty with a loss of down even if it had been 1st 2nd or 3 or 4th down--regardless of how many other fouls, in the live ball play occurred, the game would, in fact, be over and there would be no untimed down. But I do appreciate the added discussion.

Just a note - you don't subtract downs on loss of down.  You simply don't get to replay the down... aka "The down counts" after enforcement of the penalty.

[sj]

Another note. There is actually only one foul on this play. For there to be an illegal touching foul it has to be a legal forward pass. This is an illegal forward pass so there is no illegal touching.

[juxone]

Another note. There is actually only one foul on this play. For there to be an illegal touching foul it has to be a legal forward pass. This is an illegal forward pass so there is no illegal touching.

Great point.. thanks for that!

[Ralph Damren]

"Loss of Down" is merely shorthand for "Loss of Right to Repeat the Down" and also is loss of right to have an untimed down. Rule 3-3-4 was added in 2005 after a funky finish to a state championship game ..

[Ralph Damren]

IMHO, Rule 3-3-4(3) has a glitch in it. The glitch reared it's ugly head a few years ago in a NCAA game and shortly thereafter in a NFHS state championship game.

Hump day trivia : Who can identify the glitch ??

[/HINT : As you cruise the forum, you may find the answer on NCAA.... color]

[bossman72]

IMHO, Rule 3-3-4(3) has a glitch in it. The glitch reared it's ugly head a few years ago in a NCAA game and shortly thereafter in a NFHS state championship game.

Hump day trivia : Who can identify the glitch ??

[/HINT : As you cruise the forum, you may find the answer on NCAA.... color]

I think I remember you telling this story.  There was an interception or punt return with time expiring.  Returner throws an IFP from the A5 into the end zone for a "touchdown".  Crew enforces IFP but extends the period.  They then kick the game winning field goal.

[NVFOA_Ump]

Also note that NCAA had a 2021 rule change related to this.

[Ralph Damren]

Good job, guys. The full story can be found on topic: "Is this what they want ?" on NCAA board. As NVFOA Ump indicated, it appears the NCAA glitch has been corrected. The NFHS has not. As I recall, the plays under both codes involved intentional grounding on a 4th down play as time expired. The officials wrongly did the  :-\right thing and allowed B to take possession and have an untimed down. As I recall, both situations then resulted in game winning scores and plenty of media coverage.

  (5-man crew)