Author Topic: 10-4-2 Revisited  (Read 399 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1960
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-43
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
10-4-2 Revisited
« on: July 17, 2021, 01:32:06 PM »
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

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1960
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-43
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2021, 01:37:21 PM »
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

Offline ncwingman

  • *
  • Posts: 895
  • FAN REACTION: +50/-5
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #2 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?

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1960
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-43
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2021, 05:46:23 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?
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

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1960
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-43
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2021, 06:04:13 PM »
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

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1960
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-43
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #5 on: July 28, 2021, 01:59:47 PM »
Can anyone explain why KCI is exempted from this exemption?

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.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Offline Snapper

  • *
  • Posts: 51
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-0
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #6 on: July 28, 2021, 04:16:09 PM »
Can anyone explain why KCI is exempted from this exemption?

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.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

My guess is that they want to make sure that after KCI, B gets the ball and the yards.

Take for example:  On a punt, A1 interferes with B1's opportunity to make the catch, B1 then muffs the kick, and A2 falls on it.  If it weren't for the KCI exception, we'd have to enforce from the previous spot and replay the down.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1960
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-43
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #7 on: July 28, 2021, 04:34:57 PM »
My guess is that they want to make sure that after KCI, B gets the ball and the yards.

Take for example:  On a punt, A1 interferes with B1's opportunity to make the catch, B1 then muffs the kick, and A2 falls on it.  If it weren't for the KCI exception, we'd have to enforce from the previous spot and replay the down.
Maybe, but the exception would not apply in that situation any way because A (k) ended up with the ball. So regular KCI enforcement options are in play.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Ump33

  • *
  • Posts: 259
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-3
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #8 on: July 28, 2021, 07:58:44 PM »
Maybe, but the exception would not apply in that situation any way because A (k) ended up with the ball. So regular KCI enforcement options are in play.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Prior to 2018, fouls by K during a legal kick had previous spot enforcement.  When the 10-4-2 Exception was introduced in 2018, the following statement was given: "Rationale: In an effort to reduce re-kicks, further minimize risk and ensure that appropriate penalties are in place for all fouls, the committee has added an option for fouls committed by the kicking team during free and scrimmage kicks. The change would allow the receiving team all of the previous options as well as accepting the distance penalty at the end of the down."

KCI already had special enforcement (10-5-1b & 6-5-6) that gives R the option to have the foul enforced at the spot of the foul with an awarded fair catch regardless of who is in possession.  Therefore it could not be part of the 10-4-2 Exception because the Exception only applies "when K will not be next t0 put the ball in play."

Offline ncwingman

  • *
  • Posts: 895
  • FAN REACTION: +50/-5
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #9 on: July 28, 2021, 08:03:58 PM »
KCI is enforced from the spot of the foul (end of the kick). If K commits KCI but R still gains possession and then advances 20 yards, their options are to take the penalty kick + 15, or result of the play kick + 20 on the return. They have to decide if the return was greater than the penalty yardage (and awarded free kick?) or not.

If the exception applied to KCI, they'd get a third option, kick + 20 on the return + 15 for the penalty, which is excessive and therefore not allowed.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1960
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-43
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #10 on: July 28, 2021, 08:05:05 PM »
Prior to 2018, fouls by K during a legal kick had previous spot enforcement.  When the 10-4-2 Exception was introduced in 2018, the following statement was given: "Rationale: In an effort to reduce re-kicks, further minimize risk and ensure that appropriate penalties are in place for all fouls, the committee has added an option for fouls committed by the kicking team during free and scrimmage kicks. The change would allow the receiving team all of the previous options as well as accepting the distance penalty at the end of the down."

KCI already had special enforcement (10-5-1b & 6-5-6) that gives R the option to have the foul enforced at the spot of the foul with an awarded fair catch regardless of who is in possession.  Therefore it could not be part of the 10-4-2 Exception because the Exception only applies "when K will not be next t0 put the ball in play."
Thatís a great read and I agree with everything, but that really doesnít explain why the exception is excluded for KCI. First, as discussed above, the fact that K will not be the next to put the ball in play can certainly apply to KCI. Second, just because  KCI already had a succeeding spot enforcement option doesnít seem to be enough justification to warrant exclusion. In reality it would be a great argument to include KCI. Still scratching my head Ö


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1960
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-43
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #11 on: July 28, 2021, 08:08:10 PM »
KCI is enforced from the spot of the foul (end of the kick). If K commits KCI but R still gains possession and then advances 20 yards, their options are to take the penalty kick + 15, or result of the play kick + 20 on the return. They have to decide if the return was greater than the penalty yardage (and awarded free kick?) or not.

If the exception applied to KCI, they'd get a third option, kick + 20 on the return + 15 for the penalty, which is excessive and therefore not allowed.
This sounds sensible, except that letís say K clips during the kick. R returns it for 20 yds. Doesnít R get 20 + 15 on that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Ump33

  • *
  • Posts: 259
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-3
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2021, 09:02:42 PM »
Thatís a great read and I agree with everything, but that really doesnít explain why the exception is excluded for KCI. First, as discussed above, the fact that K will not be the next to put the ball in play can certainly apply to KCI. Second, just because  KCI already had a succeeding spot enforcement option doesnít seem to be enough justification to warrant exclusion. In reality it would be a great argument to include KCI. Still scratching my head Ö


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you include KCI in the Exception, what do you propose to do with the awarded fair catch option? 
R22 signals for FC at the 50 and is contacted by K18 before R22 can catch the kick.  The kick strikes K18 in the foot and bounces back to the k-40 where R47 recovers the ball.  If you go 10-4-2 Exception, are you going to "tack-on" 15 from the k-40 and still giving R an awarded FC allowing R to put the ball in play with a Free Kick at the k-25?  That's a big advantage for R.

Offline ncwingman

  • *
  • Posts: 895
  • FAN REACTION: +50/-5
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #13 on: July 28, 2021, 10:40:05 PM »
This sounds sensible, except that letís say K clips during the kick. R returns it for 20 yds. Doesnít R get 20 + 15 on that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

R doesn't get an awarded fair catch after that, like they do for KCI.

I'm guessing that's the difference, but not overly convinced it needs to be one.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1960
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-43
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #14 on: July 29, 2021, 06:16:04 AM »
Both good points. Thanks for your input guys. Iím not advocating or arguing that kci should be part of the exception. Iím just wondering why itís excluded. Iím still trying to understand all I donít know about this. I wish the guys who sat in on the rule change would give input.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Offline refjeff

  • *
  • Posts: 270
  • FAN REACTION: +8/-23
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 10-4-2 Revisited
« Reply #15 on: Yesterday at 04:50:31 PM »
KCI is enforced from the spot of the foul (end of the kick). If K commits KCI but R still gains possession and then advances 20 yards, their options are to take the penalty kick + 15, or result of the play kick + 20 on the return. They have to decide if the return was greater than the penalty yardage (and awarded free kick?) or not.

If the exception applied to KCI, they'd get a third option, kick + 20 on the return + 15 for the penalty, which is excessive and therefore not allowed.

KCI is enforced from the previous spot or the spot of the foul, not the end of the
kick.