Enforcement Spot: Foul During Touchback without Change of Possession

[MBK]

Here's a situation brought up in our study group. It's similar in essence to 10.4.5-I in the case book:

Situation: K20’s punt is blocked on K’s 5-yard line and is rolling away from K’s goal line when R1 muffs the ball into K’s end zone (applies a new force). K2 recovers the ball and attempts to advance, but is pulled down by the face mask by R11 in K’s end zone. What is the correct enforcement?

Majority ruling: The final result is a touchback. Enforce the 15-yard penalty from K’s 20-yard line. The case book cites 10-4-5 as the rules reference.

Dissenting opinion: While the result of the play is indeed a touchback and the ruling feels right, we don't see any basis in the rules for making the 20 the basic spot for enforcement in this situation. Nothing in 10.4.5 applies - a, b, and c are unrelated and d requires a change of possession, of which there was none. Similarly, 10.4.6 through 10.4.9 don't apply for various reasons including there was no change of possession. That leaves 10-4-2d - previous spot enforcement. K should be able to enforce from the previous spot or decline the penalty and take the touchback at the 20. Redding - for what it's worth - supports this ruling in two examples: #11-53 on page 163 and #61 on page 199.

How would you rule on the play?

[bama_stripes]

10.4.5 Sit I (a) says that the basic spot is the 20 yd line.  I vote with the majority.

[NVFOA_Ump]

10.4.5 Sit I (a) says that the basic spot is the 20 yd line.  I vote with the majority.

[Ralph Damren]

In 1996, at a very cold January meeting in Alaska, we passed rule  10-5-4 : Changing the basic spot from the goal line to the 20-yard line for a play that results in a touchback. Prior to that if B intercepted a pass in the EZ and was yanked down by a facemask there, B would need decline the penalty and take the ball @ 20. Accepting the penalty would only bring the ball out to the 15. It was my second proposal that passed as in 1995 I got 1-3-2 in that allowed the ball to be changed after a possession change TD. The Alaska beer was cold.

OH,back to the percieved problem at hand.  The Case Book is to supplement the Rule Book on situations that may not be clear.  While 10-4-7 stating 'following a change of possession ...' doesn't clairify MBK's question, Case 10.4.5 Sit I does. The statement prior to Table 10-4 states : 'THIS TBLE IS NOT INTENDED TO ENCOMPASS ALL FOULS AND POSSIBLE OPTIONS, BUT TO FOCUS ON CERTAIN FOULS THAT OCCUR DURING RUNNING PLAYS.' This should send us scampering for our Case Rooks...beholid, the answer is there.

I think the presented case makes the most sense.