OT - Safety Question

[Curious]

PLAY: A is first in OT. 2/10 at B8. A10 runs to B5 where he fumbles.  B50 tries to possess the loose ball but muffs it into and out of his EZ. The covering official determines B's act added a new force.  The result of the play is a Safety.

OT Play 5-1-3 states that: "if the offensive team scores a safety, the succeeding spot will be the 10 yard line in possession of the team that was on defense, provided the defensive team has not had its series of downs. The temporary score is A-2, B-0."

Here's the question: Let's say that B comes out and immediately kicks a FG on 1st down.  Does the game end B-3, A-2; or does A have another series?  In the play above, A has no option be as to the award of a safety; so, theoretically, B could benefit from putting the ball into its own EZ ("accidentally" or well coached to do so).  Further, if this play occurred in regulation play, A would not only get the two points, but also get the ball back.

I understand this play is "unlikely" to occur; but it seems to fly in the face of "fairness"

Comments

   

[ncwingman]

If that situation happened "as is", then the game is over after B scored more than A in the first OT. If B had been "smart" and just fell on the ball (since the ball is dead once B possesses it anyway -- they can't score), they could have kicked the field goal all the same and it's 3-0 in OT, game over.

B is not going to be coached to give up the safety in any case. If there's a fumble on the ground, fall on the ball and A gets zero points, not two. If B gives up the safety now they HAVE to score so they don't lose. If they kept A to zero points, they don't have to score and you just go on to a second OT.

[ncwingman]

Also, I'd like to add that the covering official that rules that the muffed fumble recovery attempt is a new force owes the rest of the crew a 6-pack each.

[GAHSUMPIRE]

I understand this play is "unlikely" to occur; but it seems to fly in the face of "fairness"

Comments

   

What is not fair?
A had the ball first, they fumbled. B's ball. Field goal wins it.

Tell A not to fumble. Tell B to fall on the ball. And tell the covering official not to make that call again.

[Curious]

If that situation happened "as is", then the game is over after B scored more than A in the first OT. If B had been "smart" and just fell on the ball (since the ball is dead once B possesses it anyway -- they can't score), they could have kicked the field goal all the same and it's 3-0 in OT, game over.

In a perfect world, B would just fall on the loose ball.  But HS players do strange things and, maybe, he WAS trying to fall on it; but execution doesn't always happen as planned. The key question is why should a safety be, in effect, handled (in terms of A getting the ball back) differently in OT than in regulation time?

B is not going to be coached to give up the safety in any case.

There are some smart coaches out there.  How about coaching a kid to "muff" a kick into your EZ when K is bearing down on the receiver?  AB, ever coached that?

If there's a fumble on the ground, fall on the ball and A gets zero points, not two. If B gives up the safety now they HAVE to score so they don't lose.

Maybe they have not been able to move the ball at all during the game but have a kicker like AB's crop...

If they kept A to zero points, they don't have to score and you just go on to a second OT.

Also, I'd like to add that the covering official that rules that the muffed fumble recovery attempt is a new force owes the rest of the crew a 6-pack each.

That's why I made the fumble happen at the B5.  If it were closer, it would be easy to bail out with a TB call.

[ncwingman]

In a perfect world, B would just fall on the loose ball.  But HS players do strange things and, maybe, he WAS trying to fall on it; but execution doesn't always happen as planned. The key question is why should a safety be, in effect, handled (in terms of A getting the ball back) differently in OT than in regulation time?

It's handled different because it is different -- it's overtime. It's like a "try" series. If B concedes a safety on a try down in a similar manner, A doesn't get the ball back then either. If B gains possession in OT, the ball is dead just like on a try.

There are some smart coaches out there.  How about coaching a kid to "muff" a kick into your EZ when K is bearing down on the receiver?  AB, ever coached that?

There is something to be gained by muffing a kick into your own EZ for a touchback instead of letting K recover a kickoff (or down a punt inside the 20). There is nothing to be gained by conceding a safety instead of recovering the fumble.

Maybe they have not been able to move the ball at all during the game but have a kicker like AB's crop...

That misses the point. AB's star kicker comes out on first down after the safety knowing that if he misses the kick, his team loses -- or he comes out on first down after they recovered the fumble knowing that if he misses, they go to double OT. If he makes it, they win either way.

In the second scenario, there's less pressure on the kicker.