Author Topic: Enforcement question (Read 33827 times)

Bwest · « **on:** March 01, 2015, 11:13:18 AM »

Was doing some off-season rule book study today and came up with this situation:

K 4/10 @ K35. K lines up with 6 men on the line of scrimmage. K punts the ball to the R20, where it is caught and returned to the R40. During the kick, R84 holds gunner K88 at the K45. During the return, R25 blocks K28 below the waist at the R30.

Enforcement?

Here are my thoughts:

Initially I was going to enforce this as R 1/10 @ R10. R declines the K foul, K chooses the PSK foul since it hurts R the most.

But after looking in the book I may be inclined to offset these fouls by rule:

Rule 10-2-3:
If each team fouls during a down in which there is a change of team possession and all R fouls are post-scrimmage kick fouls, then R may retain the ball.

This does not apply, since the second R foul is not PSK.

Rule 10-2-2:
If each team fouls during a down in which there is a change of team possession and the play does not have a post-scrimmage kick foul, the team last gaining possession may retain the ball.

Does not apply since we DO have a PSK foul.

This just leaves us with 10-2-1-b in offsetting all of these fouls. Is this correct?

Curious · « **Reply #1 on:** March 01, 2015, 12:52:39 PM »

The only way you could have off-setting fouls is if R accepted K's foul for IF. Since R is the last team in possession, they will have the first choice of acceptance or declination of their opponent's foul. Under most circumstances, R will choose to keep the ball - which requires them to decline K's foul; after which K can choose either R foul.

10-3-3 speaks to plays with PSK because (I assume) the rules makers wanted to make sure the principles of PSK weren't lost even though, technically, the COP hadn't actually occurred.

10-2-2 speaks to COP plays with NO PSK foul(s) - like a fumble recovery or interception.

Regardless, both rules provide that the team last in possession may keep the ball if their foul(s) occurred "after" the COP.

bossman72 · « **Reply #2 on:** March 01, 2015, 12:56:07 PM »

Quote from: Bwest on March 01, 2015, 11:13:18 AM

Rule 10-2-3:
If each team fouls during a down in which there is a change of team possession and all R fouls are post-scrimmage kick fouls, then R may retain the ball.

This does not apply, since the second R foul is not PSK.

Rule 10-2-2:
If each team fouls during a down in which there is a change of team possession and the play does not have a post-scrimmage kick foul, the team last gaining possession may retain the ball.

Does not apply since we DO have a PSK foul.

This just leaves us with 10-2-1-b in offsetting all of these fouls. Is this correct?

No, your gut instinct was correct.

All of R's fouls are "post-possession." Even though the PSK foul occurred while K had possession, it's treated as if it happened after R gains possession. Both of R's fouls are after the change of possession, therefore they can decline K's foul and keep the ball or offset and replay. Their choice.

Bwest · « **Reply #3 on:** March 01, 2015, 02:34:03 PM »

I understand that's probably the intent, but I'm not convinced (welcome to the offseason!)

Section 10-2 divides double fouls into categories.

10-2-2 deals with double fouls that do not have ANY PSK fouls, so we're not in that category.
10-2-3 deals with double fouls where ALL R fouls are PSK fouls. We're not in this category, although I suspect this may be the category the rules makers want this situation to be in.

10-2-1-a deals with double fouls with no change of possession. Obviously not in this category.
10-2-1-c deals with double fouls where K's foul is accepted. Not here either.

Which just leaves 10-2-1-b, which says that we offset any double foul if there is a change of possession and the team in final possession fouled before gaining possession. That is undoubtedly true in our case. There is an exception, that gives R an option to decline K's foul if ALL fouls by R are PSK. All fouls are not PSK, so the exception doesn't apply. Therefore we must offset by rule.

bossman72 · « **Reply #4 on:** March 01, 2015, 03:49:19 PM »

Quote from: Bwest on March 01, 2015, 02:34:03 PM

I understand that's probably the intent, but I'm not convinced (welcome to the offseason!)

Section 10-2 divides double fouls into categories.

10-2-2 deals with double fouls that do not have ANY PSK fouls, so we're not in that category.
10-2-3 deals with double fouls where ALL R fouls are PSK fouls. We're not in this category, although I suspect this may be the category the rules makers want this situation to be in.

10-2-1-a deals with double fouls with no change of possession. Obviously not in this category.
10-2-1-c deals with double fouls where K's foul is accepted. Not here either.

Which just leaves 10-2-1-b, which says that we offset any double foul if there is a change of possession and the team in final possession fouled before gaining possession. That is undoubtedly true in our case. There is an exception, that gives R an option to decline K's foul if ALL fouls by R are PSK. All fouls are not PSK, so the exception doesn't apply. Therefore we must offset by rule.

Take your play, but remove the PSK foul. Would you offset those two?

Bwest · « **Reply #5 on:** March 01, 2015, 04:11:29 PM »

Quote from: bossman72 on March 01, 2015, 03:49:19 PM

Take your play, but remove the PSK foul. Would you offset those two?

No, but then the play very clearly falls into the 10-2-2 rule category. Similarly, if there was no foul on the return, we would not offset because the play would fall into the 10-2-3 category.

bama_stripes · « **Reply #6 on:** March 02, 2015, 07:33:41 AM »

Quote from: Bwest on March 01, 2015, 04:11:29 PM

No, but then the play very clearly falls into the 10-2-2 rule category. Similarly, if there was no foul on the return, we would not offset because the play would fall into the 10-2-3 category.

Read Bossman's first post again. For enforcement purposes, PSK fouls are treated as if they occurred after the kick ends. Prior to FED adopting the PSK rule, we had no choice but to offset.

Bwest · « **Reply #7 on:** March 02, 2015, 08:55:26 AM »

Quote from: bama_stripes on March 02, 2015, 07:33:41 AM

Read Bossman's first post again. For enforcement purposes, PSK fouls are treated as if they occurred after the kick ends. Prior to FED adopting the PSK rule, we had no choice but to offset.

I understand that this is the philosophy for PSK fouls. I'll even concede that is probably what the rules makers intend.

But it's also clearly not what the book says. The book says that ALL R fouls must be PSK fouls, and it says this in more than one place. They could very easily have written "if all fouls by R are PSK or after the change of possession" and this would have been crystal clear not to mention more concise.

Atlanta Blue · « **Reply #8 on:** March 02, 2015, 09:16:32 AM »

Quote from: Bwest on March 02, 2015, 08:55:26 AM

I understand that this is the philosophy for PSK fouls. I'll even concede that is probably what the rules makers intend.

But it's also clearly not what the book says. The book says that ALL R fouls must be PSK fouls, and it says this in more than one place. They could very easily have written "if all fouls by R are PSK or after the change of possession" and this would have been crystal clear not to mention more concise.

I think you are taking "PSK" fouls to mean those with enforcement under the "PSK" enforcement rules. The rule means all fouls that take place after the kick, literally all "post scrimmage kick fouls". If the foul takes place after R gains possession, it happened "post scrimmage kick".

Admittedly, it could be worded better.

bkdow · « **Reply #9 on:** March 02, 2015, 09:54:27 AM »

Why would you assume that they would keep the ball if the enforcement moves them to the 10? Maybe I read the string to hastily.

Bwest · « **Reply #10 on:** March 02, 2015, 10:14:24 AM »

Quote from: Atlanta Blue on March 02, 2015, 09:16:32 AM

I think you are taking "PSK" fouls to mean those with enforcement under the "PSK" enforcement rules. The rule means all fouls that take place after the kick, literally all "post scrimmage kick fouls". If the foul takes place after R gains possession, it happened "post scrimmage kick".

Admittedly, it could be worded better.

I think this may be the only way you can get there. But "post-scrimmage kick foul" has a very specific definition with certain attributes laid out in Rule 2.

I would hope that the NFHS wouldn't be this loose with their language if "post-scrimmage kick foul" in this case actually means any foul after the kick.

To bkdow: The difference is whether team B has the option to take the ball at the 10 or if there must be a re-kick.

bkdow · « **Reply #11 on:** March 02, 2015, 11:12:48 AM »

Quote from: Bwest on March 02, 2015, 10:14:24 AM

I think this may be the only way you can get there. But "post-scrimmage kick foul" has a very specific definition with certain attributes laid out in Rule 2.

I would hope that the NFHS wouldn't be this loose with their language if "post-scrimmage kick foul" in this case actually means any foul after the kick.

To bkdow: The difference is whether team B has the option to take the ball at the 10 or if there must be a re-kick.

AH

prab · « **Reply #12 on:** March 02, 2015, 03:56:18 PM »

Quote from: Bwest on March 02, 2015, 10:14:24 AM

To bkdow: The difference is whether team B has the option to take the ball at the 10 or if there must be a re-kick.

Better to say "or if there must be a replay of the down". B would not be required to kick if the down were to be replayed.

Bwest · « **Reply #13 on:** March 02, 2015, 08:32:16 PM »

Quote from: prab on March 02, 2015, 03:56:18 PM

Better to say "or if there must be a replay of the down". B would not be required to kick if the down were to be replayed.

Right, of course not

Curious · « **Reply #14 on:** March 03, 2015, 01:44:36 PM »

Quote from: Bwest on March 02, 2015, 10:14:24 AM

I think this may be the only way you can get there. But "post-scrimmage kick foul" has a very specific definition with certain attributes laid out in Rule 2.

I would hope that the NFHS wouldn't be this loose with their language if "post-scrimmage kick foul" in this case actually means any foul after the kick.

A PSK foul occurs when all of 5 criteria are met (2-16-2h). One of those criteria is that the foul has to occur before the kick ends. In any scenario I can think of, it does not mean "any foul after the kick".

To bkdow: The difference is whether team B has the option to take the ball at the 10 or if there must be a re-kick.

As I said earlier, R would decline K's penalty in most cases in order to keep the ball. However, under certain circumstances (ultimate field position), they very well may choose to accept the penalty and replay the down.

Atlanta Blue · « **Reply #15 on:** March 03, 2015, 02:09:21 PM »

Quote from: Curious on March 03, 2015, 01:44:36 PM

As I said earlier, R would decline K's penalty in most cases in order to keep the ball. However, under certain circumstances (ultimate field position), they very well may choose to accept the penalty and replay the down.

But R can only decline K's penalty and keep the ball if all of their fouls are "PSK fouls" (10-2-3). So the only way you can let them keep the ball is if you also call their foul that came after gaining possession as a "post scrimmage kick" foul. It isn't a "PSK enforcement foul", but it is a foul that came "post scrimmage kick."

Curious · « **Reply #16 on:** March 04, 2015, 09:40:49 AM »

Quote from: Atlanta Blue on March 03, 2015, 02:09:21 PM

But R can only decline K's penalty and keep the ball if all of their fouls are "PSK fouls" (10-2-3). So the only way you can let them keep the ball is if you also call their foul that came after gaining possession as a "post scrimmage kick" foul. It isn't a "PSK enforcement foul", but it is a foul that came "post scrimmage kick."

Technically, yes; but then to Bwest's point, maybe it should be called a "post-possession foul" (with the same enforcement) as a simple way to differentiate it from a post-scrimmage kick foul. (Wasn't this term used in the NFL the past?)

bama_stripes · « **Reply #17 on:** March 05, 2015, 07:44:31 AM »

Well, the whole idea of PSK "special enforcement" is to treat those fouls the same as if the kick has already ended -- a COP foul. That gets us around changing loose ball foul definitions.

Ralph Damren · « **Reply #18 on:** March 10, 2015, 09:44:50 AM »

Fresh back into the frozen tundra and w/o rule book - under a stack of stuff, but ain't sure which stack

.....
(1) Bring both captains together

;
(2) To C-R : "You can take their penalty and we'll replay the down. If you decline it , you'll get
the ball at your 10. Do you want to put them back at their 35

?"
(3) if C-R says "Ayuh", do it; If C-R says "I want da' ball" go to C-K and say : "They have two fouls, I assume you want the one that will hurt them the most and give them the ball at their 10" -'Spect C-Kwill respond "Ayuh".

Curious · « **Reply #19 on:** March 10, 2015, 03:11:26 PM »

Okay, guys, look:

All I'm saying is that there IS IN FACT A DIFFERENCE between the two fouls. In the OP, we all agree that the foul during the return is NOT PSK. It just does not meet all the criteria of PSK.

But by simply applying the term - or IMPLYING it by enforcing it as PSK - can, understandably, confuse many officials/fans/coaches/broadcasters (ok...., just forget the last two).

Again, if we actually call it what it is (a post-possession foul), it might clarify things for everyone. The enforcement is actually consistent with a running play - which has actually turned into; and it doesn't conflict with enforcement choices following fouls by both teams during a COP down.

That's it for me.

jg-me · « **Reply #20 on:** March 10, 2015, 04:13:38 PM »

Try looking at it this way. The foul during the return was NOT pre-scrimmage kick. Don't treat it like it was.

robin083 · « **Reply #21 on:** March 17, 2015, 10:20:08 AM »

So what's the correct result?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ralph Damren · « **Reply #22 on:** March 17, 2015, 11:13:33 AM »

You have multiple fouls on R, both after COP with one of the PSK variety.
You also have a foul on K.
R may want to replay the down and can do so by accepting K's penalty.
if.....
R declines, K could choose which R foul they would want.
The PSK foul ,with basic spot the end of the kick, would be the best choice.
if.....
Time had expired during the play, K could then decline R's fouls and the period would end.
however.....
If R had originally accepted K's penalty, you would need to play an untimed down if the period had ended.
and......
If some kind of ugly critter came a' chugging out of the puckerbrush, gnawed up the football and began to chase the umpire

; you should no longer be concerned about penalty enforcement and only about if you could outrun the umpire

Atlanta Blue · « **Reply #23 on:** March 17, 2015, 12:41:31 PM »

Quote from: Ralph Damren on March 17, 2015, 11:13:33 AM

You have multiple fouls on R, both after COP with one of the PSK variety.
You also have a foul on K.

R declines, K could choose which R foul they would want.
The PSK foul ,with basic spot the end of the kick, would be the best choice.

So Ralph, you are applying 10-2-3, even though on of R's fouls is not a "PSK" foul?

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

I read 10-2-3 liberally, in that all of R's fouls came after the kick (and are thus "post-scrimmage kick"). But a strict conservative reading would say since one of R's fouls was not a "PSK" foul, R can't retain the ball, and all fouls offset.

Sounds like you are in my camp, but what would you use to prove it. And should we reword 10-2-3 to mean "all PSK and post COP fouls" rather than just "all PSK fouls"?

Curious · « **Reply #24 on:** March 17, 2015, 01:36:31 PM »

Quote from: Atlanta Blue on March 17, 2015, 12:41:31 PM

Sounds like you are in my camp, but what would you use to prove it. And should we reword 10-2-3 to mean "all PSK and post COP fouls" rather than just "all PSK fouls"?

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

Author Topic: Enforcement question (Read 33827 times)

robin083