"if any" language in 10 second runoff rule?

[zebra99]

been struggling with this one.  In 3-4-4-c, there are the words "(if any)".  What is the effect or meaning of that parenthetical?  If B declines the 10 second runoff wouldn't 3-4-3 or 3-3-2-d-10/11 apply depending on the situation?  Any ideas?  I don't think it means that if B doesn't take the 10 second component the clock must start on the ready as that could be a huge advantage to A who is trying to run the clock down, i.e. Running clock at :24, 4th down, A is ahead and false starts.

I'm probably missing something basic here but haven't figured it out yet.

[TXMike]

I think he is just saying that the clock will start on the ready, if there is a 10 second runoff or not  (Recall the offended team can elect NOT to have the runoff).

[zebra99]

but what about my play?  It meets the 3-4-4 requirements but A wants it to start on the ready so they can run 25 seconds run off before the snap.  And B doesn't want 10 seconds off.  Game over if we start on the ready.  What would we have done last year on my play?

[TXMike]

You're right.  It is incongruous.  I think we have to resort to 3-4-3 and do what is right in each situation.


RR's bulletin play:
Team A is in punt formation on fourth and 12 at the A-30. The score is tied with less than one minute remaining in regulation and the game clock is running. Team A is out of timeouts. Guard A66 commits a false start, stopping the game clock at 0:45. RULING: This is a situation where Team B might choose to accept the yardage penalty but decline the 10-second subtraction, since they will probably get the ball. If so, it is fourth and 17 at the A-25 and the game clock starts on the snap. If Team B allows the 10-second subtraction along with the five-yard penalty, the game clock starts on the referee’s signal. Note that if Team B declines the yardage penalty there is no 10-second subtraction and the game clock starts on the snap.
unoff is

[zebra99]

You're right.  It is incongruous.  I think we have to resort to 3-4-3 and do what is right in each situation.


RR's bulletin play:
Team A is in punt formation on fourth and 12 at the A-30. The score is tied with less than one minute remaining in regulation and the game clock is running. Team A is out of timeouts. Guard A66 commits a false start, stopping the game clock at 0:45. RULING: This is a situation where Team B might choose to accept the yardage penalty but decline the 10-second subtraction, since they will probably get the ball. If so, it is fourth and 17 at the A-25 and the game clock starts on the snap. If Team B allows the 10-second subtraction along with the five-yard penalty, the game clock starts on the referee’s signal. Note that if Team B declines the yardage penalty there is no 10-second subtraction and the game clock starts on the snap.
unoff is

it would have helped if RR said "....and the game clock starts on the snap because of 3-4-3."

[TXMike]

Upon further review...I think the (if any) language is just an acknowledgement that soeties there will be a runoff and sometimes there will not be

[zebra99]

it would have helped if RR said "....and the game clock starts on the snap because of 3-4-3."

so maybe a way to think about this - "If no 10 second runoff, pretend 3-4-4 doesn't exist" or something like that?

[El Macman]

By his example plays, RR is telling us that the only time the clock starts on the RFP signal is when the offended team accepts both the distance and time-subtraction penalties. In this scenario, the offended team is obviously wanting to consume as much time as possible.

If they accept the distance penalty, but decline the time-subtraction, then the clock stars on the snap, as well. That makes sense, because the reason they would decline the time subtraction is to conserve time, and starting the clock on the snap further conserves time.

If they decline the yardage, then the time-subtraction is declined by rule, and the game clock starts on the snap. I guess that follows the same concept, i.e., the offended team doesn't necessarily want time to run off the clock, otherwise, they'd accept the distance and time-subtraction penalties.

Le's don't forget - this rule only applies in the final minute of the 2nd and 4th periods.

[zebra99]

By his example plays, RR is telling us that the only time the clock starts on the RFP signal is when the offended team accepts both the distance and time-subtraction penalties. In this scenario, the offended team is obviously wanting to consume as much time as possible.

If they accept the distance penalty, but decline the time-subtraction, then the clock stars on the snap, as well. That makes sense, because the reason they would decline the time subtraction is to conserve time, and starting the clock on the snap further conserves time.

If they decline the yardage, then the time-subtraction is declined by rule, and the game clock starts on the snap. I guess that follows the same concept, i.e., the offended team doesn't necessarily want time to run off the clock, otherwise, they'd accept the distance and time-subtraction penalties.

Le's don't forget - this rule only applies in the final minute of the 2nd and 4th periods.

If the offended team declines the yardage and thus the 10 second run off, why would you start it on the snap? Wouldn't that essentially mean the foul didn't happen and it would start on the ready?  Suppose for some reason B doesn't care that A is trying to run the clock down at the end of the 1st half?

[El Macman]

Suppose for some reason B doesn't care that A is trying to run the clock down at the end of the 1st half?

If the offended team doesn't care, then they'll accept the distance and time subtraction penalties, and start the clock on the RFP signal.

I actually think this rule covers the possibilities pretty well.

[zebra99]

If the offended team doesn't care, then they'll accept the distance and time subtraction penalties, and start the clock on the RFP signal.

I actually think this rule covers the possibilities pretty well.

yes, they could do that, but what if they decided to decline distance and thus 10 sec. runoff?  I don't see rule authority to start it on the snap.  I suppose we could always say "that won't happen"   ...  but for our rules study what if it does?

[El Macman]

yes, they could do that, but what if they decided to decline distance and thus 10 sec. runoff?  I don't see rule authority to start it on the snap.  I suppose we could always say "that won't happen"   ...  but for our rules study what if it does?

What you say is true, but, if they didn't care about the clock, why would they want to decline the distance penalty? Since the space between the inbounds lines was reduced many years ago, I have not seen a team decline a distance penalty to force a more acute angle for a field goal attempt. The only other reasons you'd ever decline a distance penalty would be to take possession of the ball, or to end a period in which time has already expired - both of which make this a moot issue. It could happen, but I just don't think it is very likely. 

[zebra99]

What you say is true, but, if they didn't care about the clock, why would they want to decline the distance penalty? Since the space between the inbounds lines was reduced many years ago, I have not seen a team decline a distance penalty to force a more acute angle for a field goal attempt. The only other reasons you'd ever decline a distance penalty would be to take possession of the ball, or to end a period in which time has already expired - both of which make this a moot issue. It could happen, but I just don't think it is very likely. 

I agree with everything your say about the unlikeliness that the penalty would be declined - still my question is where in the rule book does it say or imply the clock starts on the snap IF the penalty IS declined in this situation?

[TxSkyBolt]

http://www.refstripes.com/forum/index.php?topic=7924.0

It's mentioned in the announcements part of RRs mechanics discussion. See #3.

Best regards,

Brad

[El Macman]

I agree with everything your say about the unlikeliness that the penalty would be declined - still my question is where in the rule book does it say or imply the clock starts on the snap IF the penalty IS declined in this situation?

Well, the new book may specify when we get it; but, no, the 2009-10 book doesn't. I'm going by the play situations that RR included with his bulletin on substitutions. Play number 4 covers all three possibilities - accept both (RFP), accept yards & decline time (snap), and decline yards (snap).

[zebra99]

Well, the new book may specify when we get it; but, no, the 2009-10 book doesn't. I'm going by the play situations that RR included with his bulletin on subtitutions. Play number 4 covers all three possibilities - accept both (RFP), accept yards & decline time (snap), and decline yards (snap).

I just wish these interps would appear in the rule, or a rule is cited in the play situations.   I agree certainly with the result in #4 as it makes sense.  I just can't find anything in 3-4-4 that comes close to saying the clock starts on the snap in the case of B declining the foul, the yardage or the 10 sec. runoff.  Now maybe RR is thinking about 3-4-3 applying to an unenforced A foul?  Sort of a new concept. but why not just say it in the rule?

[El Macman]

I just wish these interps would appear in the rule, or a rule is cited in the play situations.   I agree certainly with the result in #4 as it makes sense.  I just can't find anything in 3-4-4 that comes close to saying the clock starts on the snap in the case of B declining the foul, the yardage or the 10 sec. runoff.  Now maybe RR is thinking about 3-4-3 applying to an unenforced A foul?  Sort of a new concept. but why not just say it in the rule?

It certainly appears that RR is keenly aware of clock status regarding these new rules, so I'd bet your first game fee  that the clock status related to these situations will show up in Rule 3, in the new book. I have a suspicion the new book will be quite a bit different than we've ever seen. More so than ever, it will take going over with the finest of fine-tooth combs to pick up all the subtle nuances of the rules and editorial changes.