Illegal substitution philosophy in Texas A&M game

[golfingref]

End of first half, defense flagged for IS as clock was running with 4 seconds left. Offense kicks successful FG but whistles can be heard due to defense with too many on field. Dead ball foul. Since clock would expire during down, would it not be better to let it be live ball and let offense have option of result of play? Call cost offense three points.

[Rulesman]

Why would the philosophy be any different with 4 seconds on the clock than it would be, say, with 9:12 on the clock?

[Kirby]

12 in formation = dead ball foul
12th running off = live ball foul

[golfingref]

Never saw a replay to know if it was 12 in formation or not. Rulesman, I was asking for what the philosophy was.

[DallasLJ]

The more interesting question to me was what happened next.  On the next FG attempt, ball was blocked, and TAM picked the ball up at the 10 (20 yards beyond the LOS) -- and returned the ball for an apparent touchdown.  During the return, the H had a UNS against the TAM sideline.  They enforced from his flag -- apparently the spot where they came on the field.  It was unclear when the UNS occured.  If it occurred at when the Kick was blocked -- and the ball was still rolling around at the 10 -- shouldn't the penalty be enforced from the end of the kick at the 10 where TAM picked up the ball?  Since they actually enforced from the H's spot of this flag -- I can only assume the UNS occurred during the return and was behind the runner during the return.

  Thoughts?

[BankerRef]

Did they try to shut it down is the question I would ask.  If they didn't then they misapplied the rule by making it dead ball and taking the FG off the board.

On the return of the next FG attempt I don't know how they determined to enforce a foul against the bench as a live ball foul from any spot.    That is unless he invoked 9-2-3 and just did whatever he thought was right.  Based upon his announcement it sounded like a 9-2-5 foul.  Administer as dead ball - 5 yds succeeding spot.

[TxSkyBolt]

Did they try to shut it down is the question I would ask.  If they didn't then they misapplied the rule by making it dead ball and taking the FG off the board.

On the return of the next FG attempt I don't know how they determined to enforce a foul against the bench as a live ball foul from any spot.    That is unless he invoked 9-2-3 and just did whatever he thought was right.  Based upon his announcement it sounded like a 9-2-5 foul.  Administer as dead ball - 5 yds succeeding spot.

http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/88547/wild-sequence-for-aggies-owls

If it happened as R announce, the H ran into non-players who came onto the field and interfered with his duties. That is almost word for word from 9-2-3 and he was well within his rights to assess the flag at the spot of the interference, IMHO.

[psv]

Why would there have been an untimed down?

The penalty was against Team B.

[Kalle]

Why would there have been an untimed down?

The penalty was against Team B.

Why would it matter which team the live ball foul is against?

[DallasLJ]

Why would it matter which team the live ball foul is against?

  The issue with the accepted penalty is that if the offended team declined the penalty -- then the result of the play was a TD.  So, Rice wanted to accept the penalty.  Because you cannot end a quarter, half or game on an accepted penalty, they had to enforce the penalty and run an untimed down.

[Cowman52]

I'm thinking out loud but to dallas lj reply,  but the flag came during the FG try,  can't pick a point and let the penalty be enforced from there. Since there was a flag you either replay the whole down or since the flag came during the return, you don't let TD stand and bench foul in the process.  Happened once years ago and can't remember the process but was told from higher ups we got it right.  Has this changed in the later rule books?

[clearwall]

I  at the look on R's face right before he announces the foul. You can just tell he's thinking "boy, theyre sure gonna LOOOOVE this one."

[Birddog]

I was at the game and also have it recorded, so I have looked at the plays several times.  The sequence of plays at the end of the first half were different to say the least. 

Rice has no time outs and on third down the QB is sacked with about 15 seconds left in the half. They rush the FG team out and with 4 seconds left get an apparent score. The R had the U hold up the offense while the defense substituted, (seems AR 3-5-2-VII should apply here?) The down appears over but the SJ(?) has a flag for illegal sub which is announced (now listen!) as a dead ball foul. I cannot see more than 11 players in the defensive formation, even so I think the philosophy is not to put the offense at a dis-advantage by calling this a dead ball foul.

On the re-kick that was blocked.  Right after the block there was a "group" of subs/coaches who came about half way out to the bottom of the numbers (they were flagged by HL) then immediately retreated when the kick was picked up. The HL then heads up the sideline without anyone in the white or on the field.  After the TD a live ball unsportsmanlike "contact" foul was announced and an untimed down was run.

Strange sequence of plays no doubt.  There is probably a lot there that we can all learn from.

[DallasLJ]

I was at the game and also have it recorded, so I have looked at the plays several times.  The sequence of plays at the end of the first half were different to say the least. 

Rice has no time outs and on third down the QB is sacked with about 15 seconds left in the half. They rush the FG team out and with 4 seconds left get an apparent score. The R had the U hold up the offense while the defense substituted, (seems AR 3-5-2-VII should apply here?) The down appears over but the SJ(?) has a flag for illegal sub which is announced (now listen!) as a dead ball foul. I cannot see more than 11 players in the defensive formation, even so I think the philosophy is not to put the offense at a dis-advantage by calling this a dead ball foul.

On the re-kick that was blocked.  Right after the block there was a "group" of subs/coaches who came about half way out to the bottom of the numbers (they were flagged by HL) then immediately retreated when the kick was picked up. The HL then heads up the sideline without anyone in the white or on the field.  After the TD a live ball unsportsmanlike "contact" foul was announced and an untimed down was run.

Strange sequence of plays no doubt.  There is probably a lot there that we can all learn from.

  So, I was unsure of when the UNS was called on the bench.  Since it was after the kick, but before the recovery by TAM, shouldn't the enforcement spot have been the end of the kick -- where TAM picked it up at the 10 yard line.  I believe they enforced the UNS from where the coaches came onto the field.

[Legacy Zebra]

The enforcement spot should have been the succeeding spot. Game Administration Interference is administered as a dead ball foul. I know TXSkyBolt mentioned this falling under 9-2-3, but I can't imagine support for this being called an Unfair Act. Unless something huge happened that hasn't been covered yet, I think they missed this one.

[BankerRef]

The enforcement spot should have been the succeeding spot. Game Administration Interference is administered as a dead ball foul. I know TXSkyBolt mentioned this falling under 9-2-3, but I can't imagine support for this being called an Unfair Act. Unless something huge happened that hasn't been covered yet, I think they missed this one.

I've got to agree.  I had the week off so I was at this game.  Watching it live I was convinced they had blown the enforcement on both calls.

The announcements were not good in both instances.  On the second one Wagers announced; "By rule, the 15 yard penalty is enforced from where the flag is".  I hope we can all agree that there is no rule reference for a non-player foul that calls specifically for spot foul enforcement.

[TXMike]

That is the beauty of using that foul.  It carries any penalty the R deems equitable.  So you can never be wrong!!!  Don't care about spots, yardage, losses of down, etc.  Do what feels right

[dvasques]

The enforcement spot should have been the succeeding spot.

Meaning the TD should count?

[TXMike]

That would have been 1 option but for something like this taking the TD off is more than justified

[Legacy Zebra]

You really think this goes beyond game administration interference and counts as an unfair act? Because that's what you would have to say to take the TD off the board.

[TXMike]

You betcha ! Especially with the emphasis put on it this year.

[BlindZebra]

I didn't see any unfair act when I watched it and by Birddog's description no one ever interfered with the H.  Just seems like a normal sideline foul that is a live-ball administered as a dead-ball.  Points count and the foul is enforced at the 2nd half KO.

What if this was the end of the 1st quarter?  Would you have done the same thing?

[TXMike]

Didn't the R announce  " contact"?

[BlindZebra]

Now that I can't answer.  Either way though, I wouldn't deem that as unfair.

[TXMike]

  If they interfere with us doing our job, especially with contact, that is not a "simple sideline foul."