Enforcement Spot

[HeadAlphaGeek]

We are having a pre-game discussion and this scenario came up.

A 1/10 A22. QB Option pitches the ball at A25. RB catches at A23. RB is tackled at A30. During the pitch QB is face masked at A25. Would you administer from A25 or A30?

[HLinNC]

Loose ball play.  The pitch is a backward pass.

[jmckb99]

I've got a running play.

10-4-3 ART. 1 . . . A loose-ball play is action during:
a. A free kick or scrimmage kick, other than those defined in 2-33-1a.
b. A legal forward pass.
c. A backward pass (including the snap), illegal kick or fumble made by A from in or behind the neutral zone and prior to a change of team possession.

10-4-3 ART. 2 . . . A running play is any action not included under Article 1, other than those defined in 2-33-1a.

Since it's a running play, enforcement is at the end of the run, or the A30 in the OP.

[dch]

The QB ran beyond the LOS then made a backward pass to the RB.  This down consists of two running plays. The first is during the QB run and backward pass -- it ends when the RB catches the ball.  At that time a 2nd running play begins and the down ends when the runner is tackled at the 30 yd line.  The face mask foul occurred while the ball was loose but still during the first running play.  Therefore the basic spot is the end of the first run (should be a bean bag).  The foul is on the defense, the penalty is marked off from the basic spot ---  the 25 yd line.  After the yardage assessment it will be 1st down for A at the A40 yd line.

[dch]

3 different answers so far.    Anyone else going to chime in?

[CalhounLJ]

We are having a pre-game discussion and this scenario came up.

A 1/10 A22. QB Option pitches the ball at A25. RB catches at A23. RB is tackled at A30. During the pitch QB is face masked at A25. Would you administer from A25 or A30?

Administer from the 25.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ElvisLives]

In another set of rules, the end of the run is very carefully defined, and is the actual spot where possession is lost - by fumble, backward pass or illegal forward pass. (It is NOT the spot where the loose ball is caught, recovered or becomes dead.) And the Basic Spot for 3 and 1 fouls is the end of related run. For that set of rules, the enforcement spot would be the end of the run, I.e., the A-25, in this case.
How is the end of run defined for NFHS?

[CalhounLJ]

In another set of rules, the end of the run is very carefully defined, and is the actual spot where possession is lost - by fumble, backward pass or illegal forward pass. (It is NOT the spot where the loose ball is caught, recovered or becomes dead.) And the Basic Spot for 3 and 1 fouls is the end of related run. For that set of rules, the enforcement spot would be the end of the run, I.e., the A-25, in this case.
How is the end of run defined for NFHS?

Exactly the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HLinNC]

10-4-3 ART. 1 . . . A loose-ball play is action during:

c. A backward pass

During the pitch QB is face masked at A25.

The answer is right here to be found.  If the incorrect conclusion is drawn, not sure what else to do.

[CalhounLJ]

The answer is right here to be found.  If the incorrect conclusion is drawn, not sure what else to do.

The backward pass was beyond the NZ, therefore it’s not a loose ball play. The ball is simply loose during the interval between running plays.

Running play #1 ended when A lost possession by passing. Running play #2 began when A2 caught the backward pass. The loose ball interval is attached to the previous run. The spot of enforcement is from the end of the related run.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HLinNC]

I stand corrected.  Missed the LOS as the 22 not the 25.

[CalhounLJ]

I suspected that was the case. I missed it too on the first glance..

[bama_stripes]

There’s no loose-ball enforcement past the LOS.

[bossman72]

This is why I hate the NFHS definitions of loose ball and run play.  I don't like that fumbles are inconsistent with classification when behind or beyond the NZ.

I've actually submitted a rule change that never gets past (or to) my state interpreter where the basic spot for a run that ends behind the NZ is the previous spot.  This would also classify all fumbles and backward passes as RUN plays.  So the only time you would have a loose ball play (with basic spot being the previous spot) is during a legal forward pass or scrimmage/free kick.  Much simpler to understand.

For those that are curious, here is the proposal:


10-4-2. The basic spot is the previous spot…
          d. When the related run ends behind the neutral zone before a change of team possession.

10-4-4. The basic spot is the spot where the related run ends for a foul which occurs during a running play as defined in 10-3-2, unless 10-4-2d applies.

10-3-1. A loose-ball play is action during:
          c.  A backward pass (including the snap), illegal kick or fumble made by A from in or behind the neutral zone and prior to a change of team possession.

Rationale:
This change would solve an inequity in enforcement of defensive fouls where the run ends behind the neutral zone and also clean up the definitions of run and loose ball plays.  Currently, for example, if a QB gets sacked 12 yards behind the LOS, and there was Defensive Holding on the play, the foul is enforced from the end of the run, and the offense would lose 2 yards on a play where there was a defensive foul.  This change would help the Offensive/Defensive balance in penalty enforcement while keeping the All-But-One principle in-tact.
     Additionally, this would help clean up definitions of loose ball and running play.  It’s very confusing to new officials when we teach that fumbles beyond the LOS are run plays and fumbles behind the LOS are loose ball plays.  Under the change to 10-3-1, ALL backward passes and fumbles would be classified as RUNS, which would make understanding the rule better for new officials.

[Curious]

This is why I hate the NFHS definitions of loose ball and run play.  I don't like that fumbles are inconsistent with classification when behind or beyond the NZ.

I've actually submitted a rule change that never gets past (or to) my state interpreter where the basic spot for a run that ends behind the NZ is the previous spot.  This would also classify all fumbles and backward passes as RUN plays.  So the only time you would have a loose ball play (with basic spot being the previous spot) is during a legal forward pass or scrimmage/free kick.  Much simpler to understand.

For those that are curious, here is the proposal:


10-4-2. The basic spot is the previous spot…
          d. When the related run ends behind the neutral zone before a change of team possession.

10-4-4. The basic spot is the spot where the related run ends for a foul which occurs during a running play as defined in 10-3-2, unless 10-4-2d applies.

10-3-1. A loose-ball play is action during:
          c.  A backward pass (including the snap), illegal kick or fumble made by A from in or behind the neutral zone and prior to a change of team possession.

Rationale:
This change would solve an inequity in enforcement of defensive fouls where the run ends behind the neutral zone and also clean up the definitions of run and loose ball plays.  Currently, for example, if a QB gets sacked 12 yards behind the LOS, and there was Defensive Holding on the play, the foul is enforced from the end of the run, and the offense would lose 2 yards on a play where there was a defensive foul.  This change would help the Offensive/Defensive balance in penalty enforcement while keeping the All-But-One principle in-tact.
     Additionally, this would help clean up definitions of loose ball and running play.  It’s very confusing to new officials when we teach that fumbles beyond the LOS are run plays and fumbles behind the LOS are loose ball plays.  Under the change to 10-3-1, ALL backward passes and fumbles would be classified as RUNS, which would make understanding the rule better for new officials.

I AM "curious"! I love the proposal - well said.  Ralph, while I'm sure this wouldn't be - or isn't - the first attempt at the change, why does the resistance seem so strong?

[CalhounLJ]

This is why I hate the NFHS definitions of loose ball and run play.  I don't like that fumbles are inconsistent with classification when behind or beyond the NZ.

Rationale:
This change would solve an inequity in enforcement of defensive fouls where the run ends behind the neutral zone and also clean up the definitions of run and loose ball plays.  Currently, for example, if a QB gets sacked 12 yards behind the LOS, and there was Defensive Holding on the play, the foul is enforced from the end of the run, and the offense would lose 2 yards on a play where there was a defensive foul.  This change would help the Offensive/Defensive balance in penalty enforcement while keeping the All-But-One principle in-tact.

In reality, your proposal would create an imbalance here.  Imo, the math is flawed. Instead of losing 2 yds under the current code, the offense would gain 10 and a replay. Without the penalty, it would be next down with a loss of twelve. A previous spot enforcement would actually over compensate A. In essence, this would turn into a 22yd penalty + a replay. It’s not B’s fault that A gave up 12yds and a sack.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[bossman72]

In reality, your proposal would create an imbalance here.  Imo, the math is flawed. Instead of losing 2 yds under the current code, the offense would gain 10 and a replay. Without the penalty, it would be next down with a loss of twelve. A previous spot enforcement would actually over compensate A. In essence, this would turn into a 22yd penalty + a replay. It’s not B’s fault that A gave up 12yds and a sack.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I just see it differently.  When we compare previous spots between the downs, Team B is not penalized.  I see what you're saying, I just disagree.  Change would simplify the rule too.

[bossman72]

I AM "curious"! I love the proposal - well said.  Ralph, while I'm sure this wouldn't be - or isn't - the first attempt at the change, why does the resistance seem so strong?

In contrast to other proposals, mine doesn't really change offensive foul enforcement.  If Team A holds 5 yards behind the LOS on a pass play, this would still be a spot foul under my rule change.  All But One would not be changed.  All of the other proposals that get to the NFHS floor specifically want offensive fouls enforced from the previous spot.

[CalhounLJ]

I just see it differently.  When we compare previous spots between the downs, Team B is not penalized.  I see what you're saying, I just disagree.  Change would simplify the rule too.

Fair enough. I’m still confused on how this helps define loose ball plays. Your proposal for 10-3-1 reads word for word what’s in the book now.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[bama_stripes]

Here’s the reason I’ve never liked the current enforcement:

QB gets tackled by the face mask 10 yards behind the LOS.  15 yards from the end of the run + replay = 5 yard net gain.

QB gets tackled by the face mask 10 yards behind the LOS and fumbles.  15 yards from the previous spot + replay = 15 yard net gain.

[CalhounLJ]

Yes, I agree completely. The rule creates an unfair advantage for A's mistake in this situation. I also agree with Bossman that this rule is awkward and confusing. I remember when I was first promoted (demoted-depending how you look at it...) to WH, it took me three years to grasp this concept. If it hadn't been for Ralph's patient guidance and explanation, I'd still be wandering in the wilderness.

I also think Bossman is on the right track to a solution, just not through changing the spot. Instead of adding ANOTHER exception to basic spots, why not just change the definition of loose-ball play? It could be something as simple as deleting "c" from 10-3-1.

That would take care of almost every situation that would give A an unfair advantage. All B penalties behind the line of scrimmage that were not part of a "pass play" or scrimmage kick would be enforced from the end of the run or related run. All A penalties would be unaffected.

[bossman72]

I also think Bossman is on the right track to a solution, just not through changing the spot. Instead of adding ANOTHER exception to basic spots, why not just change the definition of loose-ball play? It could be something as simple as deleting "c" from 10-3-1.

That's exactly what I did.  That line through 10-3-1c in my proposal means delete.  Not sure if that shows up in your browser.  Underline means additions.

[CalhounLJ]

Gotcha. It shows up on my browser, but not on my phone. When I'm at home I normally interact on my tapatalk browser on my phone. I guess we are on the same page then... great minds and all that stuff. 

If if were me, I wouldn't add this:
10-4-2. The basic spot is the previous spot…
          d. When the related run ends behind the neutral zone before a change of team possession.

[bossman72]

Gotcha. It shows up on my browser, but not on my phone. When I'm at home I normally interact on my tapatalk browser on my phone. I guess we are on the same page then... great minds and all that stuff. 

If if were me, I wouldn't add this:
10-4-2. The basic spot is the previous spot…
          d. When the related run ends behind the neutral zone before a change of team possession.

I think you have to though.  For example if a runner fumbles in the end zone, and there is holding anywhere on the field, it would be a safety since it's penalized from the end of the run.  I think that's why they made fumbles behind the LOS previous spot, so this wouldn't be a cheap safety.

[CalhounLJ]

I think you have to though.  For example if a runner fumbles in the end zone, and there is holding anywhere on the field, it would be a safety since it's penalized from the end of the run.  I think that's why they made fumbles behind the LOS previous spot, so this wouldn't be a cheap safety.

I agree. It's sticky. The problem is resolved for a penalty by B though, by invoking 10-7.

On a foul by A, if the ball becomes dead in the end zone, that problem is solved as well, because B will decline the penalty and take the safety.

The only issue is a fumble by A in their own end zone, a foul before or during the loose ball, followed by a recovery by A and a run out of the end zone. In that case, If B accepts the penalty, the spot of enforcement would be the end zone, causing a safety.

To remedy that, we would need an exception to a rule. Which you have supplied.. I surrender..