Football Officiating > Canadian Football League

Ok, fellow Canadians

<< < (2/3) > >>

JugglingReferee:
You may have offset the L10 with a L10 at PBH.  And maybe you gave B 3 plays?

110:
I/we invoked 8.6.2(d) to its letter:
"if one of the dual fouls is a non-distance foul, it shall be applied as a 10-yard penalty."

So the 10-yard infraction of the Team B unauthorized interference (remember, B had the ball), creating a dual-foul situation with the UI of A, which turns the automatic touchdown provision allowed for due to player/coach unauthorized interference (1.13.4.(b) would have awarded a major if only A players/coaches were on the field: "... if the unauthorized person is a substitute, coach, trainer or other occupant of the team bench, [the referee] shall award a touchdown.").

So we went 50 yards back from centre, and allowed one play from the 5.

JugglingReferee:
That was my suspicion.  That's why earlier I said "And A's actions under 1-13-4b were significantly more egregious than a simple 10-yard foul, I would enforce more than a 10-yard foul".  If you think about what B's penalty is, it is taking away (a) (i) a touchdown or (ii) serious yardage, and (b) enforcing a 10 yard penalty.  A's actions were only penalized 10 yards.  (You didn't not give them a TD because of A's action, you didn't give B a TD because you already ruled that they're not getting a TD from (a) (i).)

Also, is there a reason why you didn't give B three plays?

Just wondering.

110:

--- Quote from: JugglingReferee on September 20, 2012, 07:28:03 AM ---That was my suspicion.  That's why earlier I said "And A's actions under 1-13-4b were significantly more egregious than a simple 10-yard foul, I would enforce more than a 10-yard foul".  If you think about what B's penalty is, it is taking away (a) (i) a touchdown or (ii) serious yardage, and (b) enforcing a 10 yard penalty.  A's actions were only penalized 10 yards.  (You didn't not give them a TD because of A's action, you didn't give B a TD because you already ruled that they're not getting a TD from (a) (i).)

Also, is there a reason why you didn't give B three plays?

--- End quote ---

Part of the problem here, I reiterate, is that players *and* fans of both teams swamped the field at various points in the game.

The one thing we were certain of: B gained possession of the ball before any infractions occurred.

After that, we couldn't award the B touchdown, because of the reality that A players would have been unable to pursue the play due to impediment of both fans and B players - the B bench was on that side of the field.

The reason we didn't give three plays is pretty darn simple: we invoked, to the letter, "if one of the dual fouls is a non-distance foul, it shall be applied as a 10-yard penalty."

Does it seem fair? I don't know. All I know is that 8.6.2(d) is the only authority we had in the book, and it certainly seems to suggest that non-distance fouls such as "half the distance, three plays" become "10 yards."

Might well be something that goes up the rules committee ladder for consideration.

JugglingReferee:
I bet they never thought of dual UIs.  lol

You would have had justification to keep 3 plays: when there is a change to an element outside of yardage applied, it specifically states so.  Eg:  DPI in a dual does not carry an AFD.  The removal of the AFD is explicity stated.  Because there is no specific language to not give B 3 downs in a dual UI, you could have by extension of existing rules.

I only say this, because I think A got off easy.   ;)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page