Football Officiating > National Federation Discussion

10-4-2 Revisited

(1/4) > >>

CalhounLJ:
I make a motion we add a ďcĒ to 3-3-4 to include this 10-4-2 exception we discussed here earlier. The amended rule would read:

3-3-ART. 4 ... A period shall not be extended by an untimed down if one of the following occurred during a down in which time expires:

a. When the defense fouls during a successful try/field goal and the offended team accepts the results of the play with enforcement of the penalty from the succeeding spot.

b. There was a foul by either team and the penalty is accepted for:

1. unsportsmanlike fouls,

2. nonplayer fouls,

3. fouls that specify a loss of down,

4. fouls that are enforced on the subsequent kickoff as in Rule 8-2-2, 8-2-3, 8-2-4 or 8-2-5; or

5. fouls for which enforcement, by rule, result in a safety.

c there was a foul by K on a scrimmage or free kick which qualifies for the 10-4-2 exception and R wishes to apply enforcement at the succeeding spot.

NOTE: The score is cancelled in the event of an accepted penalty that specifies a loss of down.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

CalhounLJ:
Or, we could add language at the end of 10-4-2 stating the exception doesnít apply if the kick is the last play of a period. That would read like this:

EXCEPTION: The basic spot may, at the option of the offended team, be the succeeding spot for fouls by K during a legal free or scrimmage kick down (other than kick catch interference) prior to the end of the kick when K will not be next to put the ball in play. (Note: this exception is not available if the kick is the last play of the period. In this case R would have only two options, accept the penalty with enforcement from the previous spot and replay, or decline the penalty.)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

ncwingman:
If you add 3-3-4c as written, that doesn't rule out R from enforcing at the succeeding spot as the first play of the next period -- which is an odd exception/loophole to that rule, and then things get super weird when it's the end of the 2nd or 4th quarter and the succeeding spot is either the 2nd half kick off or the first play in OT, which I believe was the whole discussion leading up to this...

I assume the intent is what you've stated in the revised exception that R would not be allowed succeeding spot enforcement in that case and their choices are replay the kick down or decline?

The concern I have is that you'd be treating foul enforcement after a COP on the final play of a period different if it's kick vs. interception/fumble. Let's say A throws an interception in the end zone on the last play of a period, where B is tackled by the facemask. Should B be able to have an untimed down from the 35, or do they have to decline the foul in that scenario too, and what makes that different than a foul on K on a last play punt into the end zone for a touchback?

CalhounLJ:

--- Quote from: ncwingman on July 17, 2021, 04:23:48 PM ---If you add 3-3-4c as written, that doesn't rule out R from enforcing at the succeeding spot as the first play of the next period -- which is an odd exception/loophole to that rule, and then things get super weird when it's the end of the 2nd or 4th quarter and the succeeding spot is either the 2nd half kick off or the first play in OT, which I believe was the whole discussion leading up to this...

I assume the intent is what you've stated in the revised exception that R would not be allowed succeeding spot enforcement in that case and their choices are replay the kick down or decline?

The concern I have is that you'd be treating foul enforcement after a COP on the final play of a period different if it's kick vs. interception/fumble. Let's say A throws an interception in the end zone on the last play of a period, where B is tackled by the facemask. Should B be able to have an untimed down from the 35, or do they have to decline the foul in that scenario too, and what makes that different than a foul on K on a last play punt into the end zone for a touchback?

--- End quote ---
I agree with your assessment and share your concerns. I think you have hit on the crux of the issue at hand. If I have to pick one, Iíd choose the latter. (Add wording to the exception). But, when you think about it, allowing R to choose enforcement on the next play of the next period is not really that much different than allowing the succeeding spot enforcement on scoring play fouls. For example, if this kick had scored and R committed the foul, then K could take enforcement on the first play of the next period or half or even overtime for that matter.

I posed two options with different outcomes for a reason. Depending on the philosophy of the rules makers, they could make enforcement at the succeeding spot the law or prohibit it explicitly. The point is something should be done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CalhounLJ:
Or, could it be something as simple as agreeing that because we canít determine at the end of the half or the game (in the case of a tie) whether K will be the next to put the ball in play, R canít use the exception in those two circumstances? Then we could allow a succeeding spot enforcement in all other cases, including the end of the first or third period?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version