Post by: VALJ on August 22, 2018, 03:22:10 PM
We're in overtime, using the NFHS recommended OT procedure. 4/G at the R 10 yard line. K's field goal attempt is unsuccessful. During the attempt, before the kick ends, K holds.
Can R elect under 10-4-2 to enforce the foul at the succeeding spot, 1/G at the 5? It's a foul by K during a scrimmage kick (or scrimmage kick down) other than KCI and K will not be the next to put the ball into play.
Post by: bbeagle on August 22, 2018, 03:43:28 PM
4th and 10 on the 50.
K kicks the ball, it's blocked at the line of scrimmage, punter recovers the ball behind the line of scrimmage
1. ... and intentionally throws the ball away.
2. ... and throws to receiver K2 who commits offensive pass interference. Ball is dropped.
3. ... and throws to receiver K2 who commits intentional offensive pass interference. Ball is dropped.
4. ... and K4 commits a 15-yard facemask on an R player on the line of scrimmage before the ball is thrown downfield to a receiver who drops the ball.
This is a scrimmage kick down, and K will not be the next to put the ball into play. Do the tack-ons apply? Does it matter in 1? Can I tack on the double foul in 3?
Post by: ncwingman on August 22, 2018, 04:56:29 PM
Seen on Facebook, and trying to open discussion here...
We're in overtime, using the NFHS recommended OT procedure. 4/G at the R 10 yard line. K's field goal attempt is unsuccessful. During the attempt, before the kick ends, K holds.
Can R elect under 10-4-2 to enforce the foul at the succeeding spot, 1/G at the 5? It's a foul by K during a scrimmage kick (or scrimmage kick down) other than KCI and K will not be the next to put the ball into play.
Strictly speaking, yes. The beginning of the OT series can be the succeeding spot for penalty enforcement.
However... what if K wins the OT coin toss and elects to go on offense first (or R wins and chooses defense)? Then K will be the next to put the ball in play and R cannot have the penalty enforced (it was effectively declined). There is no guarantee that R will be the next to put the ball in play.
What about these?
4th and 10 on the 50.
K kicks the ball, it's blocked at the line of scrimmage, punter recovers the ball behind the line of scrimmage
1. ... and intentionally throws the ball away.
2. ... and throws to receiver K2 who commits offensive pass interference. Ball is dropped.
3. ... and throws to receiver K2 who commits intentional offensive pass interference. Ball is dropped.
4. ... and K4 commits a 15-yard facemask on an R player on the line of scrimmage before the ball is thrown downfield to a receiver who drops the ball.
This is a scrimmage kick down, and K will not be the next to put the ball into play. Do the tack-ons apply? Does it matter in 1? Can I tack on the double foul in 3?
By rule, yes, all of those should be tack ons. #3 is not a double foul -- it's a double penalty for a single foul. (Edit -- and if K commits two fouls, that would be multiple, not double, but you couldn't enforce both fouls in a multiple foul situation either)
I think this highlights the need to define "scrimmage kick down" somewhere (that particular phrase is not actually defined -- we just assume it means the down during which there is a legal scrimmage kick).
Post by: SCline on August 22, 2018, 10:52:27 PM
“However... what if K wins the OT coin toss and elects to go on offense first (or R wins and chooses defense)? Then K will be the next to put the ball in play and R cannot have the penalty enforced (it was effectively declined). There is no guarantee that R will be the next to put the ball in play.”
Post by: bama_stripes on August 23, 2018, 06:20:09 AM
I thought the only carry-over fouls in FED were an R foul on a successful FG, and DB fouls after time expires in regulation.
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 23, 2018, 06:53:59 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: ncwingman on August 23, 2018, 08:48:30 AM
^ I agree with all that you said but what does this mean?
“However... what if K wins the OT coin toss and elects to go on offense first (or R wins and chooses defense)? Then K will be the next to put the ball in play and R cannot have the penalty enforced (it was effectively declined). There is no guarantee that R will be the next to put the ball in play.”
Part of the tack-on exception states that K is not the next to put the ball in play. Since the team that puts the ball in play in OT is determined by the coin toss, and not the action of the scrimmage kick down, we would have to wait until after the coin toss (and selections made) to determine if this portion of the enforcement exception is met.
Post by: Ralph Damren on August 23, 2018, 09:12:39 AM
I read something recently suggesting the tack on exception would not apply in OT. I’m sure it was not official though.NFHS provides an OT framework for states to use or modify as they choose. In Maine we will not provide a tack-on option for a missed FG in OT. Why ??? ? - Because of the confusion we share per this topic.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Orin Robinson on August 23, 2018, 09:40:53 AM
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 23, 2018, 09:49:44 AM
Part of the tack-on exception states that K is not the next to put the ball in play. Since the team that puts the ball in play in OT is determined by the coin toss, and not the action of the scrimmage kick down, we would have to wait until after the coin toss (and selections made) to determine if this portion of the enforcement exception is met.
I think this is a great argument for not allowing the exception to be applied in OT. Since, at the time of the foul, one of the requirements for the exception has not been met or determined, the exception should not apply. Same thing with carrying the foul over into the second half.
Post by: Ralph Damren on August 23, 2018, 10:23:03 AM
Post by: VA Official on August 23, 2018, 10:42:40 AM
Post by: Stinterp on August 23, 2018, 11:41:28 AM
Post by: VALJ on August 23, 2018, 12:13:36 PM
Post by: bjfb on August 23, 2018, 01:10:17 PM
It would be helpful if NFHS would issue the Interps/Corrections sooner than later.
Post by: BoBo on August 23, 2018, 02:23:23 PM
Post by: BoBo on August 24, 2018, 11:30:29 AM
On scrimmage kick that is not a try.
IN OVERTIME
If K attempts a scrimmage kick and K fouls prior to or during the kick R will have the option of the foul being enforced at the succeeding spot whether the kick is good or no good. Yes this will be crazy to explain to a coach but it is how the rule would be enforced if your state is following the NFHS Overtime procedure.
So R could have 1st and Goal at the 5 to start their OT possession.
This foul can not carry over from end of game or OT to OT. ( i have reedited the last two sentences from my original post)
From reading and self educating to have a tack on enforced, it has to be a scrimmage kick play, ball must cross the neutral zone, K must foul prior to or during the kick, and R must be next to snap the ball at the succeeding spot for any of this to even happen.
Each state has their own OT rules. THIS WOULD BE FOR STATES UNDER THE NFHS OVERTIME PROCEDURES.
** ok now you can let me know what i messed up**
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 24, 2018, 12:39:28 PM
1. The play does not have to be a scrimmage kick play. The tack on exception applies to free kicks as well.
2. The ball does not necessarily have to cross the neutral zone. There are some legal kicks that never do.
3. At the present time the exception states that any foul by K (except Kick-Catch Interference) which happens during the DOWN. While the consensus on this site is that the intention is for the exception to apply only to fouls occurring before or during the loose-ball part of the kicking down, the technical reading of down implies the totality of the down.
Post by: bbeagle on August 29, 2018, 08:20:02 AM
K1's punt is blocked. He recovers the ball in his end zone, and intentionally throws the ball away under duress.
In prior years, whether the penalty is accepted or declined, it's a safety. Ball kicked by K from the 20.
Now, the penalty should be accepted, it's still a safety, but the ball is kicked by K from the 15. I guess we would give no options now, just automatically accept the penalty?
If the clock ran out on the play, would we still enforce a safety kick? I'd imagine that R would want a free play to try to score.... they could also fair catch the kick from the 15 and get yet another untimed down to kick a fair catch field goal?
Post by: CalhounLJ on August 29, 2018, 08:25:32 AM
Post by: VA Official on August 29, 2018, 09:00:50 AM
Post by: AlUpstateNY on August 29, 2018, 10:06:02 AM
FWIW, I think that the SPIRIT of the rule is that we wouldn't carry the foul to R's possession in OT. But I'm not sure, despite VA Officials' literalism, if that's what the rule actually says.
I've never been able to consistently deal with "curve balls" (or endless speculation). So until I see a really straight fast ball, from NFHS telling me otherwise, I'm going to rely on "Resolving Tied Games" instruction 5-1-1, which advises, "If the defensive team gains possession, the ball becomes dead immediately and the offensive team's series of downs ends immediately."
"After the first team on offense has completed it's series of downs, the first team on defense will become the offensive team with the ball in it's possession at the same 10 YL anywhere between the hash marks.
5-3-1 confirms: The line to gain is always the goal line regardless of whether or not a penalty enforcement places the ball more than 10 yards from the goal line to start a new series.
Post by: jgf6 on August 29, 2018, 11:41:28 AM
Post by: VALJ on August 30, 2018, 01:06:07 PM
VALJ, in your scenario, the foul would be declined therefore not carried over into overtime. If the foul is accepted, the try would be repeated after enforcement. At least that's how I interpret the rule.
My scenario is a FG attempt, not a try.
I've never been able to consistently deal with "curve balls" (or endless speculation). So until I see a really straight fast ball, from NFHS telling me otherwise, I'm going to rely on "Resolving Tied Games" instruction 5-1-1, which advises, "If the defensive team gains possession, the ball becomes dead immediately and the offensive team's series of downs ends immediately."
"After the first team on offense has completed it's series of downs, the first team on defense will become the offensive team with the ball in it's possession at the same 10 YL anywhere between the hash marks.
5-3-1 confirms: The line to gain is always the goal line regardless of whether or not a penalty enforcement places the ball more than 10 yards from the goal line to start a new series.
Which is all well and good, Al, but if K fouls before the kick has ended, the ball isn't in the defensive team's possession, and the ball is still live.
Again, I would argue that the spirit of the rules is that this is designed primarily for a punt play, which won't happen in OT, and only incidentally applies to a failed field goal attempt. But if a smart coach calls a time out to discuss with the referee that we should tack a foul during the failed FG attempt to end the series, I'm not sure (in the absence of an interpretation from my state or from Fed) we wouldn't habe to say he's right.
Post by: jgf6 on August 30, 2018, 06:24:19 PM
If in the first series in overtime K attempts a field goal on 4th down, which is unsuccessful, and K holds during the kick. Wouldn't the same options above apply? In both cases, 10-4-2 Exception would not apply. In these cases, R cannot both accept the penalty and not replay the down. What am I missing?
Post by: AlUpstateNY on August 30, 2018, 07:06:34 PM
My scenario is a FG attempt, not a try.
Which is all well and good, Al, but if K fouls before the kick has ended, the ball isn't in the defensive team's possession, and the ball is still live.
Again, I would argue that the spirit of the rules is that this is designed primarily for a punt play, which won't happen in OT, and only incidentally applies to a failed field goal attempt. But if a smart coach calls a time out to discuss with the referee that we should tack a foul during the failed FG attempt to end the series, I'm not sure (in the absence of an interpretation from my state or from Fed) we wouldn't habe to say he's right.
Is there a difference between a "punt play" and a "field goal try" other than the field goal try, IF SUCCESSFUL, scores 3 points?
8-4 (Scrimmage Kicks), nor 8-4 (Field Goal) indicate a relevant difference (other than scoring).
NFHS 2-1-3 (Status of Ball) defines a loose ball as a pass, fumble or kick, without differentiating any further.
Overtime is simple DIFFERENT, the last sentence of "Resolved Tied Games" (pg 85) advises "PSK enforcement is not applicable in this procedure." leaving enforcement for ANY kick during OT as a "loose ball foul" enforcement. The Down is ended, the series is ended, possession reverts to the receiving team, at the subsequent spot which would be the start of the previous defense's new OT possession.
You might politely tell the smart coach, "interesting thought, but NO".
Post by: KWH on August 30, 2018, 08:59:27 PM
What about these?
4th and 10 on the 50.
K kicks the ball, it's blocked at the line of scrimmage, punter recovers the ball behind the line of scrimmage
1. ... and intentionally throws the ball away.
2. ... and throws to receiver K2 who commits offensive pass interference. Ball is dropped.
3. ... and throws to receiver K2 who commits intentional offensive pass interference. Ball is dropped.
4. ... and K4 commits a 15-yard facemask on an R player on the line of scrimmage before the ball is thrown downfield to a receiver who drops the ball.
This is a scrimmage kick down, and K will not be the next to put the ball into play. Do the tack-ons apply? Does it matter in 1? Can I tack on the double foul in 3?
The kick ended when the punter recovers the ball, so any fouls after that are ABO, and not eligible to be tack-on fouls.
Post by: KWH on August 30, 2018, 09:02:11 PM
4th and 10 on the K5. K leading 10-8 with :10 left.
K1's punt is blocked. He recovers the ball in his end zone, and intentionally throws the ball away under duress.
In prior years, whether the penalty is accepted or declined, it's a safety. Ball kicked by K from the 20.
Now, the penalty should be accepted, it's still a safety, but the ball is kicked by K from the 15. I guess we would give no options now, just automatically accept the penalty?
If the clock ran out on the play, would we still enforce a safety kick? I'd imagine that R would want a free play to try to score.... they could also fair catch the kick from the 15 and get yet another untimed down to kick a fair catch field goal?
The kick ended when the punter recovers the ball, so any fouls after that are ABO, and not eligible to be tack-on fouls.
Post by: bbeagle on August 31, 2018, 10:06:23 AM
K punter receives snap, kicks ball, it's blocked, goes out the back of the end zone at :00 on the clock.
R team kicks off in second half. Can they choose to tack on this penalty to the 2nd half kickoff?
Post by: ncwingman on August 31, 2018, 11:45:38 AM
K 4th and 10 at their 5 with :05 left in 2nd quarter, last play of the half. Illegal formation flag at the snap.
K punter receives snap, kicks ball, it's blocked, goes out the back of the end zone at :00 on the clock.
R team kicks off in second half. Can they choose to tack on this penalty to the 2nd half kickoff?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and vote No on this one.
3-3-4 lists the situations where fouls could be carried over and not having the period extended. "Succeeding spot enforcement" is not a global exception (only after a successful try or field goal). The period would have to be extended to have a succeeding spot on which to enforce the penalty -- K would free kick from the 15 after enforcement as an untimed down.
Post by: js in sc on August 31, 2018, 01:17:33 PM
K 4th and 10 at their 5 with :05 left in 2nd quarter, last play of the half. Illegal formation flag at the snap.Correct me if I am wrong, but if R declines the penalty the result is a safety and the period is over.
K punter receives snap, kicks ball, it's blocked, goes out the back of the end zone at :00 on the clock.
R team kicks off in second half. Can they choose to tack on this penalty to the 2nd half kickoff?
If R accepts the penalty, the down is replayed from the 2 1/2 yard line.
Can you accept the penalty and choose to take it at the succeeding spot in the 2nd half?
Post by: VALJ on August 31, 2018, 03:53:37 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but if R declines the penalty the result is a safety and the period is over.
If R accepts the penalty, the down is replayed from the 2 1/2 yard line.
Can you accept the penalty and choose to take it at the succeeding spot in the 2nd half?
No, because there are very specific limitations to when you can carry a foul over on a scoring play, and those apply to touchdowns, extra points, and field goals. I can't think of any situation by rule where you could carry a live ball penalty on a play that doesn't result in a TD, successful FG, or successful XP to the succeeding spot, short of a non-player or USC foul, for which the foul is always the succeeding spot. Or a DB foul after the play is over.
Post by: bbeagle on September 04, 2018, 09:56:25 AM
No, because there are very specific limitations to when you can carry a foul over on a scoring play, and those apply to touchdowns, extra points, and field goals. I can't think of any situation by rule where you could carry a live ball penalty on a play that doesn't result in a TD, successful FG, or successful XP to the succeeding spot, short of a non-player or USC foul, for which the foul is always the succeeding spot. Or a DB foul after the play is over.
3-3-3. A period shell be extended by an untimed down if one of the following occurred during a down in which time expires:
a. There was a foul by either team and the penalty is accepted. (With exceptions like UNS, non-player, etc. which don't apply here).
I don't see why that rule is ignored.
Post by: CalhounLJ on September 04, 2018, 10:03:25 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: ncwingman on September 04, 2018, 10:45:05 AM
3-3-3 is ignored in the play u posted because of 3-3-4. The safety prevents the period from being extended.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
3-3-4 only kicks in if the safety is due to the basic spot enforcement of the penalty. What is happening here is different in that the safety is the result of the play and the penalty is being enforced at the succeeding spot. Basic spot enforcement of the penalty would be from the previous spot, not resulting in a safety that would invoke 3-3-4.
Post by: CalhounLJ on September 04, 2018, 10:50:06 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: ncwingman on September 04, 2018, 12:32:12 PM
3-3-4 would apply because we won’t replay a down when a safety is involved, right?
That is oversimplifying the rule a little bit, and is complicated by the new tack on rule, which is the absurdity that we're all pointing out in this thread.
Beagle's First Situation -- During a scrimmage kick down during which time expires, K commits a foul in their own end zone. Result of the play is a safety.
Previous years -- R has the following options: a) Decline the foul and take the results of the play (a safety). Period ends since there is no accepted foul. b) Accept the foul, the enforcement of which is a safety due to the enforcement spot being ABO, in K's end zone. The period is not extended due to 3-3-4.
This year -- R has an additional option: c) Accept the results of the play and enforce the penalty from the succeeding spot. In this situation, the result of the play is also a safety BUT the safety was not a result of the enforcement of the foul (3-3-4(b)5: "... the penalty is accepted for fouls for which enforcement, by rule, result in a safety"). By rule, the succeeding spot enforcement of the foul is not the safety. Since this enforcement option does not trigger 3-3-4, the period must be extended to allow for a succeeding spot for enforcement purposes.
Beagle's Second Situation -- During a scrimmage kick down during which time expires, K commits a foul simultaneous with the snap. Result of the play is a safety.
In this situation, the only thing that is different is Option B. Accepting the foul with basic spot enforcement has the enforcement from the previous spot, which does not result in a safety, so now 3-3-4 is not triggered and the period would be extended. Situations A and C are still in play and the same outcome as previous.
The simplification of "We don't extend when a safety is involved" held previously because when a safety was involved previously it was either a) the result of the play (and you'd have to decline the foul in this situation) or b) the result of penalty enforcement (which always triggered 3-3-4), but that simplification falls apart because there is now a third option on scrimmage kick downs with succeeding spot enforcement.
Post by: blandis on September 05, 2018, 12:40:53 AM
Post by: bbeagle on September 05, 2018, 09:35:05 AM
The simplification of "We don't extend when a safety is involved" held previously because when a safety was involved previously it was either a) the result of the play (and you'd have to decline the foul in this situation) or b) the result of penalty enforcement (which always triggered 3-3-4), but that simplification falls apart because there is now a third option on scrimmage kick downs with succeeding spot enforcement.
Exactly what I was alluding to with the safety play.
Can we tack-on the yardage after a safety when B is next to kick off? (Would only occur at the end of a half or end of the game)
Post by: AlUpstateNY on September 05, 2018, 09:36:29 AM
10-4-2 Exception says the tack on applies to a Free Kick Down or Scrimmage Kick Down. No mention of a Try so this is a moot argument.
2-24-4 defines a "scrimmage kick is any kick from in or behind the NZ during a scrimmage down."
8-3-1 concludes, "This (the try) involves a scrimmage down which is neither numbered or timed."
Post by: Ralph Damren on September 05, 2018, 09:44:24 AM
Exactly what I was alluding to with the safety play.No, a penalty that results in a safety is considered penalty enough. A penalty that results in a safety is not afforded an untimed down as all the kicker would need to do is kick the ball off the tee with his big toe and pick it up to end the period - not a wise idea if it ended the 1st or 3rd period, though. :)
Can we tack-on the yardage after a safety when B is next to kick off? (Would only occur at the end of a half or end of the game)
Post by: CalhounLJ on September 05, 2018, 02:37:05 PM
That is oversimplifying the rule a little bit, and is complicated by the new tack on rule, which is the absurdity that we're all pointing out in this thread.
Beagle's First Situation -- During a scrimmage kick down during which time expires, K commits a foul in their own end zone. Result of the play is a safety.
Previous years -- R has the following options: a) Decline the foul and take the results of the play (a safety). Period ends since there is no accepted foul. b) Accept the foul, the enforcement of which is a safety due to the enforcement spot being ABO, in K's end zone. The period is not extended due to 3-3-4.
This year -- R has an additional option: c) Accept the results of the play and enforce the penalty from the succeeding spot. In this situation, the result of the play is also a safety BUT the safety was not a result of the enforcement of the foul (3-3-4(b)5: "... the penalty is accepted for fouls for which enforcement, by rule, result in a safety"). By rule, the succeeding spot enforcement of the foul is not the safety. Since this enforcement option does not trigger 3-3-4, the period must be extended to allow for a succeeding spot for enforcement purposes.
Beagle's Second Situation -- During a scrimmage kick down during which time expires, K commits a foul simultaneous with the snap. Result of the play is a safety.
In this situation, the only thing that is different is Option B. Accepting the foul with basic spot enforcement has the enforcement from the previous spot, which does not result in a safety, so now 3-3-4 is not triggered and the period would be extended. Situations A and C are still in play and the same outcome as previous.
The simplification of "We don't extend when a safety is involved" held previously because when a safety was involved previously it was either a) the result of the play (and you'd have to decline the foul in this situation) or b) the result of penalty enforcement (which always triggered 3-3-4), but that simplification falls apart because there is now a third option on scrimmage kick downs with succeeding spot enforcement.
I agree it was a bad choice of words. I was trying to read, post, and eat at the same time... but I'm also pretty confident that by the time they get this kicking exception ironed out, the statement will still be true. If there is a safety involved on the last play of either half, we will not extend the period for an untimed down.
Post by: bbeagle on September 05, 2018, 02:55:52 PM
No, a penalty that results in a safety is considered penalty enough. A penalty that results in a safety is not afforded an untimed down as all the kicker would need to do is kick the ball off the tee with his big toe and pick it up to end the period - not a wise idea if it ended the 1st or 3rd period, though. :)
This is not a penalty that results in a safety though.
The play ended with a safety and there was a penalty for something else.
Original play:
K 4th and 10 from K5, illegal formation flag for not enough men on the line. K punts, punt is blocked. Kicker recovers and is downed in the end zone. This is the last play of the 2nd quarter.
We can't extend the period, because there is a rule saying we can't do that on a safety. Fine. But the NEXT play will be the kickoff to start the 3rd quarter. R is kicking off.
This seems to match all the requirements of the tack-on foul - scrimmage kick, K fouls before the kick is over, R next to put the ball into play.
Post by: red viking on September 05, 2018, 04:02:22 PM
Post by: bbeagle on September 05, 2018, 04:08:20 PM
Wouldn't K be the one putting the ball in play though if they were tackled in their own end zone (kicking off from their own 20)?
This is the last play of the half. There is :00 on the clock at the end of the second quarter. Therefore, K does not kick from their 20. The half is over.
K has it's choice for the second half, and chose to receive. Therefore, R is kicking the ball next.
Post by: red viking on September 05, 2018, 04:10:36 PM
This is the last play of the half. There is :00 on the clock at the end of the second quarter. Therefore, K does not kick from their 20. The half is over.
K has it's choice for the second half, and chose to receive. Therefore, R is kicking the ball next.
OK. Thanks for clarifying. Yes, they are next to put the ball in play but not as a result of the kicking play. I think that is the intent of the rule even if it isn't explicitely stated.
Post by: bbeagle on September 06, 2018, 07:15:16 AM
OK. Thanks for clarifying. Yes, they are next to put the ball in play but not as a result of the kicking play. I think that is the intent of the rule even if it isn't explicitely stated.
Yes, it IS a kicking play. K punted the ball and it was blocked.
Post by: CalhounLJ on September 06, 2018, 08:17:45 AM
Post by: Ralph Damren on September 06, 2018, 08:39:09 AM
(1) Penalty enforced at succeeding spot, R's ball w/untimed down;
(2) Penalty enforced at previous spot, K's ball w/untimed down;
(3) R declines penalty, half ends, band plays, cheerleaders prance, zebras gnaw on unsold hotdogs at snack-shack;
(4) 2nd half starts as a 2nd half does, remember guys, only USC or DBPFs would carry over to the 2nd half.
PS: Talking about #3 has brought on hunger...time for some sardine waffles eAt& eAt& eAt& eAt& eAt& (5 man crew) !
Post by: Ralph Damren on September 06, 2018, 09:00:26 AM
Something to ponder :
As K is kicking off the start the 2nd half, are not they the team that is putting the ball in play ??? ??? ??? ?
As R will be the team to touch the ball with something other than one's foot, would R be the next to put in play ??? ??? ??? ?
PS: To Yankee Al - a 10 game lead may be all they need (private joke only understood by those of Red Sox Nation ;) ).
.
Post by: bbeagle on September 06, 2018, 09:41:43 AM
2nd half starts as a 2nd half does, remember guys, only USC or DBPFs would carry over to the 2nd half.
Yes, I know that's a previous interpretation of the rules before this tack-on penalty. It's not a real rule.
I have found nowhere in the rules stating that this new tack-on can't be added to the next half kickoff.
(I think the spirit of this rule is to not put it on the next half kickoff, but the rules don't say that as far as I can tell)
Post by: Ralph Damren on September 06, 2018, 12:16:07 PM
If the penalty IS accepted, an untimed down is created.
If the penalty IS declined, there is nothing to tack on to.
Hope this helps to make it more clear.
Post by: bbeagle on September 06, 2018, 01:26:49 PM
The tack-on option ONLY applies IF the penalty is accepted.
If the penalty IS accepted, an untimed down is created.
If the penalty IS declined, there is nothing to tack on to.
Hope this helps to make it more clear.
There is an exception in the rules saying there is NO untimed down for this though:
3-3-4: A period shall not be extended for an untimed down if one of the following occurred during a down in which time expired:
b. There was a foul by either team and the penalty is accepted for:
4. fouls that are enforced on the subsequent kickoff.
Post by: Ralph Damren on September 06, 2018, 01:44:30 PM
There is an exception in the rules saying there is NO untimed down for this though:
3-3-4: A period shall not be extended for an untimed down if one of the following occurred during a down in which time expired:
b. There was a foul by either team and the penalty is accepted for:
4. fouls that are enforced on the subsequent kickoff.
That refers to fouls in the 8-2 family - occur on a scoring play where the subsequent kickoff is an option.
Example : Foul on B, TD as clock @ 0:00 - A can ask for penalty on PAT or kickoff. The PAT is always an untimed down and would be played (unless scoring team had already won) OR on subsequent kickoff which would occur in the next period.
Post by: bbeagle on September 06, 2018, 04:08:51 PM
That refers to fouls in the 8-2 family
You're right. It specifically mentions field goals, touchdowns and tries. No safeties.
So, I guess we need an untimed down for a kickoff? But the kickoff would come from K, so then the tack-on couldn't be applied?
Post by: VA Official on September 06, 2018, 05:02:36 PM
You're right. It specifically mentions field goals, touchdowns and tries. No safeties.
So, I guess we need an untimed down for a kickoff? But the kickoff would come from K, so then the tack-on couldn't be applied?
8-2-2 through 8-2-5 only covers fouls on TDs. If the “subsequent kickoff” part of 3-3-4 only applies to those which it mentions when it says “as in...” then fouls on a try would require an untimed KO because they are covered in 8-3.
Post by: KDJBBBJ on September 06, 2018, 06:07:23 PM
Post by: VA Official on September 06, 2018, 06:10:34 PM
3-3-3 A period shall be extended by an untimed down if one of the following occurred during a down in which time expires. A try is not a down in which time expires as it is an untimed down no matter what. Time has already expired so you would not have an untimed down. You would either replay the down after then enforcement of the penalty, take it at the succeeding spot in the second half, if applicable, or decline and go to half time.
Good catch. Then bbeagle you are correct. Tack-on is not an option because it would require an untimed down in which K would next put the ball in play via KO. We would go with normal ABO enforcement options.
Post by: CalhounLJ on September 06, 2018, 06:35:14 PM
K 4th and 10 at their 5 with :05 left in 2nd quarter, last play of the half. Illegal formation flag at the snap.So, back to the beginning. In this situation, R has options. They can:
K punter receives snap, kicks ball, it's blocked, goes out the back of the end zone at :00 on the clock.
R team kicks off in second half. Can they choose to tack on this penalty to the 2nd half kickoff?
Accept a 5 yd penalty from the previous spot and K can replay the down. OR-
Decline the penalty, take the two points and go to halftime.
Is that right?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: VA Official on September 06, 2018, 06:38:10 PM
So, back to the beginning. In this situation, R has options. They can:
Accept a 5 yd penalty from the previous spot and K can replay the down. OR-
Decline the penalty, take the two points and go to halftime.
Is that right?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Based on the combined efforts here that’s what I’m going with. Seems that’s what has rules support.
Post by: Ralph Damren on September 07, 2018, 07:30:45 AM
(1) If there is a tack-on foul on the last play of a period, the opponents can decline the penalty and the period has ended.
(2) If there is a tack-on foul on the last play of a period, the opponents can accept the penalty and have an untimed down. UNLESS...
FRIDAY TRIVIA TESTER..WHAT WOULD BE A PLAY WHERE THEY COULD ACCEPT THE PENALTY BUT NOT GET AN UNTIMED DOWN?
(HINT: FOUL BY K THAT DIDN'T QUALIFY FOR TACK-ON)
Post by: ncwingman on September 07, 2018, 09:29:47 AM
Try not to over-think this rule change, guys, and please consider these two points :
(1) If there is a tack-on foul on the last play of a period, the opponents can decline the penalty and the period has ended.
(2) If there is a tack-on foul on the last play of a period, the opponents can accept the penalty and have an untimed down. UNLESS...
FRIDAY TRIVIA TESTER..WHAT WOULD BE A PLAY WHERE THEY COULD ACCEPT THE PENALTY BUT NOT GET AN UNTIMED DOWN?
(HINT: FOUL BY K THAT DIDN'T QUALIFY FOR TACK-ON)
After thinking about it I realize that some of my previous posts are not entirely correct and therefore, I believe beagle's plays answer the trivia question.
After a safety, R is NOT the next to put the ball in play. K puts the ball in play by a free kick. Therefore, if there is a scrimmage kick down where the end result is a safety, any foul by K is NOT eligible for the tack on option.
Of course, if the safety is due to the foul itself, then 3-3-4 kicks in, and there's no untimed down.
EDIT -- To put a specific situation in, K holds in the end zone during a punt as time expires. Accepting the penalty results in a safety, no period extension.
Post by: brettjr2005 on September 07, 2018, 11:49:08 AM
Try not to over-think this rule change, guys, and please consider these two points :
(1) If there is a tack-on foul on the last play of a period, the opponents can decline the penalty and the period has ended.
(2) If there is a tack-on foul on the last play of a period, the opponents can accept the penalty and have an untimed down. UNLESS...
FRIDAY TRIVIA TESTER..WHAT WOULD BE A PLAY WHERE THEY COULD ACCEPT THE PENALTY BUT NOT GET AN UNTIMED DOWN?
(HINT: FOUL BY K THAT DIDN'T QUALIFY FOR TACK-ON)
Fouls that don't qualify for an untimed down:
A foul that results in a safety
An unsportsmanlike foul
A nonplayer foul
A dead ball foul (that occurs after time expires)
I feel like I'm missing something here, though.
Post by: js in sc on September 07, 2018, 01:32:09 PM
Fouls that don't qualify for an untimed down:Fouls that specify loss of down.
A foul that results in a safety
An unsportsmanlike foul
A nonplayer foul
A dead ball foul
I feel like I'm missing something here, though.
Post by: brettjr2005 on September 07, 2018, 03:10:17 PM
Post by: Ralph Damren on September 11, 2018, 10:37:05 AM
(1) R blocks K1's punt;
(2) K2 picks up the blocked punt and begins to run;
(3) K2 crosses the LOS and then decides to throw a forward pass;
(4)K2 flagged for IFP;
(5) LOD fouls don't qualify for UTD.
If the foul resulted in a safety there wouldn't be an UTD. Good job, Guys.