Start clock on the snap after team ahead foul

[ElvisLives]

Had a game list night with two not very good teams, but very equally matched. Relatively high scoring, considering they weren't very good.
3/15, A-30, team Alpha ahead one point, inside one minute in 4th period. Alpha ball carrier advances to the A-37 (inbounds), but teammate called for holding. Team Bravo elects to decline the penalty, to bring up 4th down. By 3-4-3, we declare that the game clock will start on the snap. Alpha coach gets annoyed - doesn't understand why we didn't start the game clock on the RFP. Had to go over and explain 3-4-3 to him. They punt. Bravo takes over the the B-40 or so. With 10-seconds remaining Bravo throws a Hail Mary that Alpha intercepts at the goal line, and advances enough for the clock to expire.Game over.
Kinda fun.

[SCline]

So I’m glad this came up. I’m not an NCAA official I read the rule book and am wondering if there’s an approved ruling that I’m missing.

There was kind of a big game last night. TV and all has been hyping it all week. Team A is leading by 7 late in the 4th quarter. 2/10, on a run that loses 3 yards A is called for holding. After the play 2:00 remains on the game clock. The referee announces initially that B has accepted the foul and it brings up a replay of 2nd down. A lot of confusion and discussion ensues and the referee then announces B has declined the penalty which brings up 3/13. The ball is spotted and the ready for play is whistled but the game clock does not start. A appears to be upset that the game clock did not start and another conference by officials ensues. Afterwards the game clock still does not start with the RFP.

My initial reaction as not an NCAA official is the game clock should have started on the RFP, am I missing something?

[ElvisLives]

3-4-3 gives specific direction to give the offended team the choice to start the game clock on the RFP or snap when the opponent commits any foul with less than 2 minutes remaining in the 2nd or 4th period. With exactly 2 minutes remaining, this part of 3-4-3 does not apply. (P.S. This is irrespective whether the penalty is accepted or declined.)

However, 3-4-3 also gives the Referee the authority to start the game clock on the RFP or snap, if he believes a team has done something unfair to conserve or consume game time. This applies any time during the game, but the rule gives specific guidance to consider invoking this rule when there are less than 5 minutes remaining in the 2nd or 4th periods. Obviously, that can be quite subjective. Perhaps that is what happened in this case.

[bossman72]

3-4-3 gives specific direction to give the offended team the choice to start the game clock on the RFP or snap when the opponent commits any foul with less than 2 minutes remaining in the 2nd or 4th period. With exactly 2 minutes remaining, this part of 3-4-3 does not apply. (P.S. This is irrespective whether the penalty is accepted or declined.)

However, 3-4-3 also gives the Referee the authority to start the game clock on the RFP or snap, if he believes a team has done something unfair to conserve or consume game time. This applies any time during the game, but the rule gives specific guidance to consider invoking this rule when there are less than 5 minutes remaining in the 2nd or 4th periods. Obviously, that can be quite subjective. Perhaps that is what happened in this case.

I like using the R authority here and going on the snap.  Don't give them a timing advantage by fouling.

[ref6983]

I like using the R authority here and going on the snap.  Don't give them a timing advantage by fouling.

What time advantage would they gain by committing a live ball holding foul? With the foul, play clock is set to 25. Without the foul, it’s set to 40.

[ElvisLives]

I like using the R authority here and going on the snap.  Don't give them a timing advantage by fouling.

That's a "slippery slope," as they say in the TV lawyer shows. If it is a deliberate foul, then, yeah, they would get an unearned advantage. But, if it is a foul that is unintentional, and could happen at any other time in the game, then the opponent is not put at any greater disadvantage than they would have been at any other time, so the fouling team shouldn't be further penalized, just because it happened to occur near the end of a half. Certainly, holding fouls will probably be the most 'suspect' of live-ball fouls. Those are easy to commit intentionally while disguising them as unintentional. So, invoking 3-4-3 is supportable.
BBW, clipping, etc., are not likely to be intentional - not impossible, but not likely.
Thankfully, the Rules Committee took the judgment out of our hands when under 2 minutes in a half, for fouls by the team ahead in score. In the given example, one second later, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[Legacy Zebra]

What time advantage would they gain by committing a live ball holding foul? With the foul, play clock is set to 25. Without the foul, it’s set to 40.[\quote]

True, but if the penalty is accepted they get to run the play clock down, repeat the down and then run the  40 seconds play clock down. The offense is getting an extra ~30 seconds because they are repeating the down.

[ElvisLives]

What time advantage would they gain by committing a live ball holding foul? With the foul, play clock is set to 25. Without the foul, it’s set to 40.

It isn't the play clock, it is the game clock. If it would normally start on the RFP, then Team A cold burn 25 seconds off the game clock, then commit another foul, burn off 25 more seconds, etc. etc., until playing time expires. So, the opponent of the fouling team gets to choose to have the game clock start on the RFP or snap.

[Legacy Zebra]

In the given example, one second later, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Given this statement, I think it’s reasonable to apply 3-4-3 at the R’s discretion. There’s a reason the rule specifically says to consider it under 5 minutes. I wouldn’t let 1 second difference allow the offense to run a extra 25 seconds off.

[Sonofanump]

I did not find the holding to consider 3-4-3 and think it should have been RFP.
Will see if Shaw comments on it this week for clarification. 

[ref6983]

It isn't the play clock, it is the game clock. If it would normally start on the RFP, then Team A cold burn 25 seconds off the game clock, then commit another foul, burn off 25 more seconds, etc. etc., until playing time expires. So, the opponent of the fouling team gets to choose to have the game clock start on the RFP or snap.

You’re adding more fouls to the situation that did not occur.

On the play, there was OH. Clock stopped at 2:00. If no foul, the offense, with a 40 second play clock, game clock could run it to 1:21 snap. With a foul, they could only run it to 1:36. There is absolutely no unfair clock tactic by committing that foul as it actually conserves time for the defense rather than consumes it. In fact, the foul put themselves at a clock disadvantage. Given that, 3-4-3 cannot possibly apply.

Subsequent fouls may or may not be unfair and those would be judged accordingly.

[ElvisLives]

You’re adding more fouls to the situation that did not occur.

On the play, there was OH. Clock stopped at 2:00. If no foul, the offense, with a 40 second play clock, game clock could run it to 1:21 snap. With a foul, they could only run it to 1:36. There is absolutely no unfair clock tactic by committing that foul as it actually conserves time for the defense rather than consumes it. In fact, the foul put themselves at a clock disadvantage. Given that, 3-4-3 cannot possibly apply.

Subsequent fouls may or may not be unfair and those would be judged accordingly.

Not commenting on 3-4-3 further, here, but considering Team A is not guilty of a foul for delay of game until the play clock reads 0:00 (by rule), they actually do have a full a 25 or 40 seconds to put the ball in play, which means the game clock could run down to 1:20, or 1:35 before drawing a flag. Seconds matter.

[ref6983]

Not commenting on 3-4-3 further, here, but considering Team A is not guilty of a foul for delay of game until the play clock reads 0:00 (by rule), they actually do have a full a 25 or 40 seconds to put the ball in play, which means the game clock could run down to 1:20, or 1:35 before drawing a flag. Seconds matter.

Correct. Or they could avoid delay by snapping at 1:21 or 1:36.

However, the most likely scenario would be for the defense to use a TO which they had.

[bossman72]

That's a "slippery slope," as they say in the TV lawyer shows. If it is a deliberate foul, then, yeah, they would get an unearned advantage. But, if it is a foul that is unintentional, and could happen at any other time in the game, then the opponent is not put at any greater disadvantage than they would have been at any other time, so the fouling team shouldn't be further penalized, just because it happened to occur near the end of a half. Certainly, holding fouls will probably be the most 'suspect' of live-ball fouls. Those are easy to commit intentionally while disguising them as unintentional. So, invoking 3-4-3 is supportable.
BBW, clipping, etc., are not likely to be intentional - not impossible, but not likely.
Thankfully, the Rules Committee took the judgment out of our hands when under 2 minutes in a half, for fouls by the team ahead in score. In the given example, one second later, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I disagree because there was a great example of this in the LSU-Auburn game last year.  LSU gets the ball with 2 min and change left.  Need a first down to ice it.  1st down they get called for OH.  They get backed up and R starts on RFP.  They then take knees to end the game.
That is what I mean by gaining a timing advantage by fouling.  Not intentional, but you gained an advantage by fouling.

Here is the play sequence.  Video should start at 2:52:50 with 1st down.
https://youtu.be/iifI9rX_LVc?t=10370

[bama_stripes]

Under NCAA rules, can the offended team both decline the penalty AND choose to hold the clock until the snap?  Under FED, they would have to accept to get the clock option.

[ElvisLives]

Under NCAA rules, can the offended team both decline the penalty AND choose to hold the clock until the snap?  Under FED, they would have to accept to get the clock option.

Yes. 3-4-3 is very carefully worded and refers to the "completion of a penalty," not the acceptance of a penalty, with regard to a foul by the team ahead in score during the last 2 minutes of a half. A penalty is completed when it is accepted or declined by the offended team; when the choice is obvious to the referee; or when canceled by rule. So, it doesn't make any difference if the penalty is accepted or declined - the offended team has the option to start the game clock on the referee's signal or on the snap.