Offsetting Fouls

[JasonTX]

Team A free kicks from the A-35.  A80 is flagged for being offside.  While the kick is in the air, B20 and B30 join together shoulder to shoulder and form a wedge that is flagged at the B-30.  The ball is caught at the B-20 and is returned to the 50 where the runner steps out of bounds.  Penalty Options?

[ElvisLives]

Since live-ball fouls by both teams occurred before physical change of possession, there is no opportunity for “clean hands.” These foul simply offset, and the down (kickoff) is repeated.

Go forth and prosper!

Robert

[bossman72]

2010 NCAA bulletin #2

3. Team A kicks off at its 30-yard line. During the kick receiving team players B43, B67 and B80 drop back and form a three-man wedge at their 16-yard line to block for the return. Receiver B22 catches the ball at the B-6 and returns it to the B-40 where he is tackled. In an attempt to "break up" the wedge A44 dives and hits B67 at the knees at the B-18.

RULING: Foul by Team B for an illegal wedge. Foul by A44 for blocking below the waist during a kicking down. Team B fouled before gaining possession, so the "clean hands" exception to offsetting fouls does not apply. The fouls offset, and Team A re-kicks at the previous spot. (New rule; 9-1-2-e-4, 10-1-4)

[bossman72]

Seems counter-intuitive to me since they're trying to do a bastardized "PSK" on a free kick with enforcing it from the spot of the foul and giving Team B the ball on a normal play without any other fouls.  To me, it should be treated as post-possession.  However, the 2010 bulletin sayeth the lord.

[Morningrise]

Yeah, that's a little strange. It also seems strange that this "PFK" enforcement exists at all. Not only because of its sui generis enforcement, but also because a free kick is just that - free to be recovered by either team. So if B forms a wedge and prevents A from maybe reaching the loose ball, it seems fishy that re-kicking is never an option... which means, it also seems fishy that if A commits an unrelated foul, re-kicking suddenly goes from NOT an option to the ONLY option.

I mean, I get the LARGER philosophy, which is to reduce dangerous techniques AND reduce re-kicks in general

And I suppose wedges are only illegal when it's not an "onside kick formation," so if we're flagging it, I guess it's philosophically fair to consider A as having conceded possession, similar to the reason why PSK exists

[blindtxzebra]

So if Team A was not offside and the wedge is still formed we would penalize from the spot of the foul, essentially saying Team B got the ball with clean hands? But, if Team A fouls (offside in this case) then we say no clean hands and the fouls offset? That makes little sense to me. Am I the only one thinking this? 

[JasonTX]

So if Team A was not offside and the wedge is still formed we would penalize from the spot of the foul, essentially saying Team B got the ball with clean hands? But, if Team A fouls (offside in this case) then we say no clean hands and the fouls offset? That makes little sense to me. Am I the only one thinking this?

Nope.  You hit on the very reason I posted this.

[ElvisLives]

Oh, please...  I'm too old for another rule change.

[JasonTX]

Oh, please...  I'm too old for another rule change.

All we need is an exception to the exception to the exception.