Enforcement question

[hear to learn]

Team A scores a TD, after the TD A18 gives the throat slash, dead ball foul.  Team B elects to have the unsportsmanlike enforced on the kickoff.  During the try Team A misses the extra point, but Team B roughs the kicker and team A elects to re try.  Can Team B now enforce the Unsportsmanlike on the try now? Or do they have to keep it on the kickoff??

[El Macman]

Team A scores a TD, after the TD A18 gives the throat slash, dead ball foul.  Team B elects to have the unsportsmanlike enforced on the kickoff.  During the try Team A misses the extra point, but Team B roughs the kicker and team A elects to re try.  Can Team B now enforce the Unsportsmanlike on the try now? Or do they have to keep it on the kickoff??

They must keep it on the kickoff.

[Diablo]

They must keep it on the kickoff.

I believe that is correct.  But I can't find support in the current Rules & Interpretations.  Passage 1-1-5-b in the 2009-'10 reads, "A field captain’s first announced choice of any options offered his team shall be irrevocable."  That passage is absent in the 2011-'12 & 2012-'13 versions.

[El Macman]

I believe that is correct.  But I can't find support in the current Rules & Interpretations.  Passage 1-1-5-b in the 2009-'10 reads, "A field captain’s first announced choice of any options offered his team shall be irrevocable."  That passage is absent in the 2011-'12 & 2012-'13 versions.

As usual, I think there is a Play Situations Bulletin play from previous years that covers this, but it would/will take me a while to find it.

[JasonTX]

The penalty shall be completed before the ball is declared ready for the next down.  Once we make it ready there's no changing the penalty enforcement. 10-1-1-c

[Diablo]

As usual, I think there is a Play Situations Bulletin play from previous years that covers this, but it would/will take me a while to find it.

Given the relevant passage was removed from the rules last year, I would be concerned as to the validity of bulletin play appearing prior to 2011.

The penalty shall be completed before the ball is declared ready for the next down.  Once we make it ready there's no changing the penalty enforcement. 10-1-1-c

I see where 10-1-1-c mandates that the offended captain must exercise his penalty option before the RFP.  But it does not address whether he can change his mind afterwards.

[jg-me]

10-1-1-c in combination with 5-2-9 would seem to make it pretty clear that any penalty decision cannot be revisited once completed and the ball has either been put in play or a half has ended.

[DallasLJ]

They cannot change their decision. How would you enforce it if they changed their mind.  The penalties are dead ball - live ball, they would not offset.  So, presumably you would enforce the Roughing 1/2 the distance, then back them up 15 yards to the 16 1/2 for the UNS.   Or would you do it in order of occurance - back them up 15 to the 18 for the UNS and then enforce the roughing 1/2 the distance to the 9?

  I agree, once the ball was snapped, the decision to enforce the UNS on the kickoff was set in stone. 

[JasonTX]

Given the relevant passage was removed from the rules last year, I would be concerned as to the validity of bulletin play appearing prior to 2011.


I see where 10-1-1-c mandates that the offended captain must exercise his penalty option before the RFP.  But it does not address whether he can change his mind afterwards.

The key word is "before".  If he were allowed to change options it would say "before or after the RFP or after the next down."

[NVFOA_Ump]

The key word is "before".  If he were allowed to change options it would say "before or after the RFP or after the next down."

Big "except" here in that now without the "old language" we are in the same place.  The try will be repeated and the RFP has not yet been given so why can't we now revisit the "delayed penalty" and ask team B when the penalty should be enforced as long as the decision is made before the RFP on the re-try?  There must be a specific intent behind the "old" language being removed, and it would seem to be common sense that if the down was going to be replayed, that team B should be allowed to revisit the option of enforcing the penalty on the upcoming re-try or on the subsequent free kick.

There's no element of we've enforced the penalty, the box and/or the chains have moved, etc.  The material conditions have changed and it would seem to me to be unfair to make the previous choice unchangeable despite a replay of the try.  Also, why would the language have been removed if it was not intended to address this kind of issue?

[JasonTX]

Big "except" here in that now without the "old language" we are in the same place.  The try will be repeated and the RFP has not yet been given so why can't we now revisit the "delayed penalty" and ask team B when the penalty should be enforced as long as the decision is made before the RFP on the re-try?  There must be a specific intent behind the "old" language being removed, and it would seem to be common sense that if the down was going to be replayed, that team B should be allowed to revisit the option of enforcing the penalty on the upcoming re-try or on the subsequent free kick.

There's no element of we've enforced the penalty, the box and/or the chains have moved, etc.  The material conditions have changed and it would seem to me to be unfair to make the previous choice unchangeable despite a replay of the try.  Also, why would the language have been removed if it was not intended to address this kind of issue?

Since the ready for play has already been given for the Try it is "in stone".  A "re-try" is a whole new down and that is 2 downs after the original penalty being accepted.  We have basically placed that penalty on the shelf and will not remove it until we line up for the kickoff.

[Diablo]

They cannot change their decision. How would you enforce it if they changed their mind.  The penalties are dead ball - live ball, they would not offset.  So, presumably you would enforce the Roughing 1/2 the distance, then back them up 15 yards to the 16 1/2 for the UNS.   Or would you do it in order of occurance - back them up 15 to the 18 for the UNS and then enforce the roughing 1/2 the distance to the 9?

Hmmm.  That does pose a wee problem.   

[NVFOA_Ump]

No one said this would be simple but it seems extremely inequitable to have a 15 yard penalty "in the bank" which cannot be used even after the circumstances that led to the initial enforcement decision have changed.  Additionally, although not 100% on point, I'd follow the guidance in 10-1-6-b here and enforce live-ball then dead-ball fouls.

[VALJ]

One bite of the apple.  "You took it on the kick, coach."