Declining the penalty for an illegal forward pass

[Ralph Damren]

Hate to pepper pick a bit, but this is only true in a situation like the original scenario where you have an *incomplete* illegal forward pass.

Change the scenario slightly:

4th and 10 at the A2 -- A1 takes the snap in the shotgun (standing in his end zone), and pitches the ball forward to a jet-sweeping A32. A32 is still in his endzone when he then throws a forward pass, completed to TE A87. A87 is then tackled at the A10.

B can decline the penalty for the IFP and take the result of the play, short of the line to gain, turnover on downs. B's ball at the A10.

Declining the penalty  would put the ball at the end of A87's run. If the IFP was intercepted, the ball would be placed at the end of B's run if penalty was declined.

[bbeagle]

Declining the penalty  would put the ball at the end of A87's run. If the IFP was intercepted, the ball would be placed at the end of B's run if penalty was declined.

That's the problem I have with this rule in NFHS. For a legal forward pass, if it's incomplete, the ball is placed at the previous spot with the down advancing.

An illegal forward pass can be caught and advanced by the offense, it can be intercepted by the defense. And the results of the play are the SAME as a legal forward pass if the penalty is declined.

But why is there a DIFFERENT rule when the pass is incomplete? Instead of ruling that both illegal and legal forward passes are officiated the SAME, NFHS rules effectively have an 'exception' that an incomplete illegal forward pass is officiated differently. WHY?

It's much easier if the rule was the SAME for any passes thrown behind the line of scrimmage. It just makes our lives as officials harder. Coaches and fans think we're 'nuts' if they effectively cannot decline the penalty and take an incomplete pass, and we all have to remember this 'exception'.

[AlUpstateNY]

A LEGAL forward incomplete pass, includes the consequence, to the passer, of the down counting, from the previous spot.  An ILLEGAL forward pass (Complete or incomplete) provides the same same consequence, in addition to a 5 yard penalty, but considering the foul happened during the running play action, specifies the spot of the foul is from the end of the run (spot of the pass). 

NFHS 7-5-2 provides the offended team with the additional option, "It has the choice of having the down counted at the spot of the illegal incomplete pass or (if the illegal pass is caught or intercepted) of having the the ball put in play as determined by the action which followed the catch Which adds significant potential additional risk, and consequence, to the Illegal passer's decision to throw a forward pass, ILLEGALLY.

[sj]

Except for a situation where the result is the same for both accepting and declining a penalty due to math is this 8-2-5-c situation the only one where accepting or declining the penalty gives the offended team the same result?

The first clause of 8-2-5-c says that it’s a safety only if the penalty for the foul is accepted. So if the penalty is declined the offended team can in effect turn down the safety and get the result of the play if they want.

Does anybody have insight as to why there is an exception made to that if the foul is for an illegal forward pass? In other words why is a foul for holding in the end zone treated differently than if it’s a foul for an illegal forward pass?

[bbeagle]

A LEGAL forward incomplete pass, includes the consequence, to the passer, of the down counting, from the previous spot.  An ILLEGAL forward pass (Complete or incomplete) provides the same same consequence, in addition to a 5 yard penalty, but considering the foul happened during the running play action, specifies the spot of the foul is from the end of the run (spot of the pass).

No, an illegal forward pass does NOT provide the same consequence.

The rule considers an illegal forward pass that is incomplete to be the end of a running play, NOT a pass.
The rule considers an illegal forward pass that is complete to be a PASS, not a running play. (The PENALTY would be enforced as a running play  - or an all-but-one, but not the play itself)

That is where there is inconsistency. 'Oh, the pass didn't happen if it is incomplete' is basically what the rules are saying. Oh, allow time to tick off the clock while the ball is in the air, oh, and stop the clock when the ball hits the ground like a legal incomplete pass. So, the play ended already at the spot of the illegal pass if 3 seconds later we find out the pass hits the ground, but any other penalty, like holding in the end zone, the play doesn't end right there, it is allowed to take it's normal football conclusion.

That's inconsistent, and to me, wrong.

[PABJNR]

How does a downfield official not kill this play if you are suggesting the ball should be live after it hits the ground? Especially on a pass from beyond LOS? Guess what, the play would end with an inadvertent whistle when the ball hits the ground almost every time. As I downfield official I’m either still “on my key” or in zone, and neither of them has me watching the QB, and even if I were watching the QB no way I could tell if pass was thrown beyond LOS. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[js in sc]

How does a downfield official not kill this play if you are suggesting the ball should be live after it hits the ground? Especially on a pass from beyond LOS? Guess what, the play would end with an inadvertent whistle when the ball hits the ground almost every time. As I downfield official I’m either still “on my key” or in zone, and neither of them has me watching the QB, and even if I were watching the QB no way I could tell if pass was thrown beyond LOS. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The ball hitting the ground kills the play whether the pass is legal or illegal.  I beleive his comment that the play does not end with an incomplete illegal pass is that the pass itself does not end the play but the result of the pass.  You would blow it dead when it hits the ground in both instances.

[bossman72]

No, an illegal forward pass does NOT provide the same consequence.

The rule considers an illegal forward pass that is incomplete to be the end of a running play, NOT a pass.
The rule considers an illegal forward pass that is complete to be a PASS, not a running play. (The PENALTY would be enforced as a running play  - or an all-but-one, but not the play itself)

That is where there is inconsistency. 'Oh, the pass didn't happen if it is incomplete' is basically what the rules are saying. Oh, allow time to tick off the clock while the ball is in the air, oh, and stop the clock when the ball hits the ground like a legal incomplete pass. So, the play ended already at the spot of the illegal pass if 3 seconds later we find out the pass hits the ground, but any other penalty, like holding in the end zone, the play doesn't end right there, it is allowed to take it's normal football conclusion.

That's inconsistent, and to me, wrong.

It's not inconsistent. If you put all incomplete passes back to the LOS for the sake of consistency, what happens when a runner goes for a 50 yard gain and throws an illegal forward pass?  You putting it back at the previous spot?  No, you put it at the end of the run.  He gained all of those yards legally.

Illegal forward passes are runs, whether they're complete or incomplete.  Nothing that applies to legal forward passes applies to illegal forward passes (DPI/OPI, IDP, ITP, eligibility, etc).

Plus, from a practicality standpoint, it would be impossible to treat illegal forward passes like fumbles.  PABJNR gave a great example of exactly why we can't.

[Ralph Damren]

NFHS doesn't enjoy exceptions. IMHO, having two separate enforcement spots if the IFP occurred behind or beyond the LOS would = exception = another rule to learn. Holding in one's end zone on a play whose run ended in one's end zone would also have the same results if accepted or declined.

[CalhounLJ]

I agree with Bossman. As one who intentionally decided to only study/learn NFHS rules, this particular rule is not confusing or inconsistent to me. Simply call it as written, and move on.

[bbeagle]

this particular rule is not confusing or inconsistent to me

Play: 4th and 10 from Team A's 5 yard line. Punt team in. Snap is errant, punter recovers ball in end zone and is surrounded by defense, he scrambles and throws the ball away while still in the end zone. Ball hits the ground uncaught.

No flag down - Team B gets the result of the play - ball on Team A's 5 yard line.
Flag down - Team B has no choice but to take a safety. They cannot choose the original 'result of the play' - because that changed to a safety ONLY because a flag was thrown.

Why is an illegal forward pass (that is incomplete) the ONLY penalty that changes the result of the play?

If a hold, facemask, clip, illegal kick, etc. penalty flag is thrown in the end zone, they can all be declined - and the result of the play doesn't change based on these flags being thrown. Only a flag for an illegal forward pass changes the result of the play.

If the flag is picked up (waved off), then the defense gets what they wanted. Normally, picking up a flag is the same as declining the penalty, but NOT in the case of an illegal forward pass flag.

Now, you can mince words and say that throwing the flag did not cause the play to change - the illegal forward pass did. But that's not true. Only an illegal forward pass that is recognized by the officials WITH A FLAG changes the play. An illegal forward pass unnoticed by officials has the same rules as a regular forward pass.

[bossman72]

Why is an illegal forward pass (that is incomplete) the ONLY penalty that changes the result of the play?

So you want an incomplete IFP that happens 50 yards down field on a run to be put back at the previous spot too?

[bama_stripes]

Bbeagle, you’re conveniently bypassing the consequences of a safety.  The defense gets two points AND they get the ball in what is almost always very advantageous field position.  In fact, I’d venture that the actual award for a safety is somewhere around 4.5 to 5 points.  That’s probably very close to the average number of points scored when a HS team has 1st-and-goal.

OK, there may be a specific situation (defense trails by 5+ with very little time remaining) where the defense would want the ball at the previous spot.  My answer to that: Play better for the previous 47 minutes so you don’t get so far behind.

[bbeagle]

Bbeagle, you’re conveniently bypassing the consequences of a safety.

No, I am definitely not.

A safety is 2 points. 1st and Goal for good varsity teams is at least 3 points, possibly 7 or 8 points.

I bet if the rule for a safety were choice of (a) 2 points and the ball at midfield or (b) 1st and goal at the 5, I bet most teams would take 1st and goal at the 5.

[VALJ]

If the punter's pass was caught by the center at the A4, with no legal receivers in the area, there should still be flags for intentional grounding and illegal touching, correct?  At that point, assuming the center was tackled short of the line to gain (say the A6), team B could decline both penalties, accept the result of the play, and then have the ball first and goal from the A6?

I know I'm late to the party, but isn't illegal touching a LOD foul?  No reason for B to decline the illegal touching since they'd get the ball at the three (half the distance from the enforcement spot, then the LOD.)

[CalhounLJ]

Play: 4th and 10 from Team A's 5 yard line. Punt team in. Snap is errant, punter recovers ball in end zone and is surrounded by defense, he scrambles and throws the ball away while still in the end zone. Ball hits the ground uncaught.

No flag down - Team B gets the result of the play - ball on Team A's 5 yard line.
Flag down - Team B has no choice but to take a safety. They cannot choose the original 'result of the play' - because that changed to a safety ONLY because a flag was thrown.

Why is an illegal forward pass (that is incomplete) the ONLY penalty that changes the result of the play?

If a hold, facemask, clip, illegal kick, etc. penalty flag is thrown in the end zone, they can all be declined - and the result of the play doesn't change based on these flags being thrown. Only a flag for an illegal forward pass changes the result of the play.

If the flag is picked up (waved off), then the defense gets what they wanted. Normally, picking up a flag is the same as declining the penalty, but NOT in the case of an illegal forward pass flag.

Now, you can mince words and say that throwing the flag did not cause the play to change - the illegal forward pass did. But that's not true. Only an illegal forward pass that is recognized by the officials WITH A FLAG changes the play. An illegal forward pass unnoticed by officials has the same rules as a regular forward pass.

There is nothing confusing or inconsistent about anything you posted. We're still playing by basic pass rules, even though the pass is illegal. If it's incomplete, the outcome of any penalty is the same as a "normal" pass play. If the pass were legal, we would have previous spot basic spot, with spot of foul behind the basic spot, so the penalty is enforced from the spot of the foul. Same outcome with the illegal forward pass. Although technically considered a "running play," the outcome of the penalty is still the same. spot of foul in the endzone behind the basic spot, it's a safety. If it's complete, B still has the option of declining the penalty and taking the result of the play. If they happened to intercept and score, I'm sure they would take this option. If they choose to take the penalty, we mark off from spot of foul, just like in every other situation.