2014 NCAA FOOTBALL PLAY INTERPRETATIONS BULLETIN NO. 1

[Andrew McCarthy]

Play number 8 has me scratching my head. Why are we winding the clock?

Second and 12 at the B-25. Team A trails by two points late in the fourth quarter with either one timeout or no timeouts remaining. Ball carrier A44 is hit at the B-15 and as he goes down the ball becomes loose. B22 recovers, returns for several yards and is tackled with no time remaining on the game clock.
After review, the Instant Replay official rules that A44 was down before losing possession of the ball.

RULING: If Team A has no timeouts remaining, the game is over. If Team A has a timeout remaining, they may use it to have third and 2 at the B-15. The game clock is adjusted to its reading when the ball carrier should have been ruled down. In this case the game clock starts on the referee’s signal.
Note: This option to use a timeout and reset the game clock applies only if the game clock expires during the down. (Play 134, 2014 Instant Replay Casebook)

[Kalle]

Play number 8 has me scratching my head. Why are we winding the clock?

Why would we not wind the clock? There was no 3-3-2-d reason to stop the clock, so this is a referee's discretionary timeout, and the clock starts on the ready.

[Legacy Zebra]

There was no 3-3-2-d reason to stop the clock

Team A took a time out (3-2-2-d-5). Shouldn't that make the clock start on the snap?

[Kalle]

Ah, right, I misread the ruling. I read it to say that if no timeout is used, the clock would start on the ready and the time would expire before team A could get a play off. But it does read that team A needs to use a timeout to get the clock reset and even then the clock would start on the ready. Doesn't make any sense to me, either...

[goodgrr]

Ah, right, I misread the ruling. I read it to say that if no timeout is used, the clock would start on the ready and the time would expire before team A could get a play off. But it does read that team A needs to use a timeout to get the clock reset and even then the clock would start on the ready. Doesn't make any sense to me, either...

If the logic is that if we had ruled correctly, team A would have had a chance to call that time out, then why wouldn't they be put back into the same clock situation as down/distance situation?

[NVFOA_Ump]

Pretty sure that "If Team A has a timeout remaining, they may use it to have third and 2 at the B-15. The game clock is adjusted to its reading when the ball carrier should have been ruled down. In this case the game clock starts on the referee’s signal."

Should read "If Team A has a timeout remaining, they may use it to have third and 2 at the B-15. The game clock is adjusted to its reading when the ball carrier should have been ruled down. In this case the game clock starts on the snap."

If we had not missed the down by contact to begin with, team A would most certainly used their final timeout and had time to run another play.  Don't see how we could deprive them of that and don't see how we're starting the clock on the RFP after a legal team timeout.

[Rulesman]

"...down by contact..."

When was this added to the NCAA rule book?

[NVFOA_Ump]

When was this added to the NCAA rule book?

Extra words can get us in trouble - I stand corrected.  Should have simply said down.

[Rulesman]

Extra words can get us in trouble - I stand corrected.  Should have simply said down.

+1

[TXMike]

Maybe another example of the same type of thought process that permitted a targeting yardage penalty to stand even though the targeting call itself was reversed and player allowed back in the game.  The thinking at that time was that they did not want to open the door too far for IR to get involved in reviewing foul calls.  This Bulletin ruling may be saying they want to allow IR to correct a mistaken judgment call, but only to a point.

[bossman72]

Extra words can get us in trouble - I stand corrected.  Should have simply said down.

I like using "down by rule" instead of "down by contact"

[TXMike]

Drinking game...every time we hear that  (down by contact) this year in a NCAA telecast you have take a shot of your finest tequila.  (And if it is uttered by a R during his announcement, then you have to take 4 of them)

[FLbackjudge]

Gonna have to buy more tequila!

[Rulesman]

You'll be loaded by the first media time out.

[dvasques]

good thing not many NCAA games are broadcast in Brasil

[psv]

Why is this a Safety and not a TD?

Batting the Ball into the End Zone
3. Fourth and goal at the B-5. Team A’s field goal attempt is blocked and does not
cross the neutral zone. To prevent recovery by Team A, B88 bats the ball backward
toward his end zone. The ball does not touch the ground in the end zone before A33
recovers the ball there.

RULING: Safety; two points for Team A. The ball is dead in Team B’s end zone when
A33 recovers it, since the status of the ball is a kick. Team B is responsible for the ball
being in its end zone because the batting by B88 gives new impetus. (6-3-6, 8-5-1-a, 8-7-
2)

[jg-me]

B never touched the scrimmage kick while the ball was beyond the NZ. Therefore, when A recovered the ball in the end zone, the ball became dead and belongs to the receiving team (B) by rule (see 6-3-2, 3 and 6a). The ball is dead in an end zone so it has to be one of three things - TB, TD or safety. It is clearly not a TD or TB and it is a safety due to the impetus imparted by B.

[bossman72]

Why is this a Safety and not a TD?

Ask yourself this: If Team A catches a punt in the end zone, is it a TD?  Same rules apply to this situation.

It can only be a Touchback or Safety.  Since B is now responsible for putting it in the end zone, it's not going to be a touchback.  Has to be safety.