RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: El Macman on March 22, 2011, 10:35:02 AM
-
Nothing we probably didn't already know.
Wish he'd work on the BBW rule.
COLLEGE FOOTBALL OFFICIATING, LLC
TEN-SECOND SUBTRACTION FROM THE GAME CLOCK
The making of the rules can be a fascinating process, illustrated perfectly by this new rule. Often one game can grab the attention of the country in such a way that a consensus quickly forms around the need for a rules change. And that’s what happened. The story of one of the 2010 bowl games was that the offensive team apparently created an unfair clock advantage that allowed them to kick a game-tying field goal and subsequently win the game in overtime. Largely as a result of that game, the rules committee in 2011 approved a rule that deals with a team gaining a clock advantage by committing a foul late in the game.
Here’s the new rule:
Rule 3-4-4 (New Article)
10-Second Subtraction from Game Clock
ARTICLE 4.
a. With the game clock running and less than one minute remaining in either half, if a player of either team commits a foul that causes the clock to stop, the officials may subtract 10 seconds from the game clock at the option of the offended team. The fouls that fall in this category include but are not limited to:
(1) Any foul that prevents the snap (e.g., false start, encroachment, defensive offside by contact in the neutral zone, etc.);
(2) Intentional grounding to stop the clock;
(3) Incomplete illegal forward pass;
(4) Backward pass thrown out of bounds to stop the clock;
(5) Any other foul committed with the intent of stopping the clock.
The offended team may accept the yardage penalty and decline the 10-second subtraction. If the yardage penalty is declined the 10-second subtraction is declined by rule.
b. The 10-second rule does not apply if the game clock is not running when the foul occurs or if the foul does not cause the game clock to stop (e.g., illegal formation).
c. After enforcement of the penalty and 10-second subtraction (if any) the game clock starts on the referee’s signal.
d. If the fouling team has a timeout remaining it may avoid the 10-second subtraction by using a timeout. In this case the game clock starts on the snap after the timeout.
The rule has several elements to it, so let’s break them down and then look at some examples.
1. The rule applies only if the game clock is running inside one minute of either half. With one or more minutes in the half the referee has broad discretion about when to start and stop the clock under Rule 3-4-3. It is only when the game clock reads 0:59 or less that this new rule comes into effect, and then only if the game clock is running when the foul is committed. If the previous play had been an incomplete pass, for example, the game clock would not be running so the new rule would not apply.
2. The rule applies equally to either team. We tend to think of the offense as the team trying to manipulate the clock—of the two teams the offense is more in control of the pace of the game—but the rule applies to the defense as well. It may be that the defense is behind and thus wants to get the clock stopped, so it commits a foul—by, say, jumping offside to make contact. The same rule applies to Team B as to Team A. Those familiar with the NFL rule will recognize a difference here: the 10-second subtraction rule in the NFL only applies to Team A.
3. Only those fouls that cause the clock to stop are affected by this rule. There is some confusion on this point, which sometimes arises out of not understanding the difference between a foul and a penalty. For example, if a team commits a false start, the officials shut the play down; this is a foul that stops the clock. But if a team snaps the ball when it has five players in the backfield—an illegal formation—the play continues: this is not a foul that stops the clock. Of course once the ball is dead the clock is stopped, but this is to administer the penalty; the clock is not stopped because of the foul itself.
4. The 10-second subtraction is not automatic: the offended team has the option. There could be circumstances where the offended team would not want the time taken off the clock, perhaps in the hope that it would get possession of the ball with time remaining. The offended team may accept the yardage penalty and elect not to have time taken off the clock. But if it declines the yardage penalty the 10-second subtraction does not apply.
5. Intent is not an issue in applying this rule. It could be that the fouling team does not intend to commit the foul—an unintentional false start is the usual example—but that doesn’t matter. The rule applies if the conditions are met, and intent has nothing to do with anything.
6. The fouling team may avoid the 10-second subtraction if it has a timeout to use. It is unlikely that this team would foul in the situation where it has a timeout, but it could happen, so in such a case it could use the timeout and avoid the 10-second subtraction.
PLAY SITUATIONS
1. Second and 10 at the B-30. The game clock is running in the second half. Team A trails by two points and is out of timeouts. After the ball is ready for play lineman A66 commits a false start, and when the officials stop the game clock it reads (a) 13 seconds; (b) 8 seconds. Team B accepts the yardage penalty and the time subtraction. RULING: (a) Five-yard penalty with 10 seconds subtracted from the game clock, which is set at 3 seconds. Second and 15 at the B-35. The clock starts on the referee’s signal. (b) The game is over. Team B wins.
2. Second and 10 at the B-30. The game clock is running in the second half. Team A trails by two points and is out of timeouts. At the snap Team A has five players in the backfield. A22 carries for a three-yard gain to the B-27. When the ball is declared dead the game clock reads (a) 13 seconds; (b) 8 seconds. RULING: (a) and (b) Five-yard penalty, illegal formation. Second and 15 at the B-35. Because the illegal formation is not a foul that causes the clock to stop, the 10-second subtraction does not apply. After the penalty is administered the game clock starts on the referee’s signal.
3. Team A is leading 24-21 with less than one minute in the game and the game clock running. With the ball ready for play on third and seven at the B-35, tackle B55 jumps across the neutral zone and contacts A77. The officials shut the play down with the game clock showing 0:38. Team B is out of timeouts. RULING: Offside against Team B. Five-yard penalty and a 10-second subtraction from the game clock. The game clock is set at 0:28. Third and two at the B-40. The clock starts on the referee’s signal.
4. Team A is in punt formation on fourth and 12 at the A-30. The score is tied with less than one minute remaining in regulation and the game clock is running. Team A is out of timeouts. Guard A66 commits a false start, stopping the game clock at 0:45. RULING: This is a situation where Team B might choose to accept the yardage penalty but decline the 10-second subtraction, since they will probably get the ball. If so, it is fourth and 17 at the A-25 and the game clock starts on the snap. If Team B allows the 10-second subtraction along with the five-yard penalty, the game clock starts on the referee’s signal. Note that if Team B declines the yardage penalty there is no 10-second subtraction and the game clock starts on the snap.
-
4. Team A is in punt formation on fourth and 12 at the A-30. The score is tied with less than one minute remaining in regulation and the game clock is running. Team A is out of timeouts. Guard A66 commits a false start, stopping the game clock at 0:45. RULING: This is a situation where Team B might choose to accept the yardage penalty but decline the 10-second subtraction, since they will probably get the ball. If so, it is fourth and 17 at the A-25 and the game clock starts on the snap. If Team B allows the 10-second subtraction along with the five-yard penalty, the game clock starts on the referee’s signal. Note that if Team B declines the yardage penalty there is no 10-second subtraction and the game clock starts on the snap.
Why does the game clock start on the snap? Shouldn't it start on the RFP because it was running before the foul? I know it starts on the snap if they are in a scrimmage kick formation and get a DOG foul, but I don't see why it would start on the snap here.
-
Starting on the snap will give team B more time once they get the ball. It would be to their advantage to have it start on the snap
-
Yep, that's the standard 3-4-3 application.
-
So do I have my hands around these situations based on how the new rules are written?
PLAY 1: Time is running out in the game, Team A rushes to the line, QB takes the snap and spikes the ball, clock stops with 9 seconds left. The wideout never got back to his side of the line to get set.
Ruling- false start and include 10 second runoff. Game over. Team A loses.
PLAY 2: Time is running out in the game, Team A rushes to the line, QB takes the snap and spikes the ball, clock stops with 9 seconds left. Eleven players got set for one second. A85 mistakenly came on to the field as a sub prior to the snap, realized he was not supposed to be in, and was on his way off, 5 yards from the sideline as the ball was snapped.
Ruling: illegal substitution. 5 yard penalty. Clock starts on the snap. Team A kicks game-winning FG.
-
Yep, that's the standard 3-4-3 application.
If RR was invoking 3-4-3 on this, why wouldn't he explicity say that? It makes sense to do that, but it reads like that is the enforcement regardless of time of game, 3-4-3 issues, etc.
-
"The story of one of the 2010 bowl games was that the offensive team apparently created an unfair clock advantage that allowed them to kick a game-tying field goal and subsequently win the game in overtime. Largely as a result of that game, the rules committee in 2011 approved a rule that deals with a team gaining a clock advantage by committing a foul late in the game. "
His words, not mine.
This makes it clear to me that the committee's intent is to keep a team from getting a clock advantage by committing a foul late in the game. I believe that implies the automatic use of 3-4-3 in situations like that shown in Example 4
-
Can someone help me by explaining a situation where we need a 10 second runoff against the defense? I have racked my brain and have only come up with one foul where a 10 second might be necessary. I am open to any scenarios that you can think of.
-
Dead ball offside (by contact or interfering with offensive formation)
A dead ball sub infraction by B
-
Can someone help me by explaining a situation where we need a 10 second runoff against the defense? I have racked my brain and have only come up with one foul where a 10 second might be necessary. I am open to any scenarios that you can think of.
Score A21-B20, 30 seconds remaining in the game, 2nd and 10 at A-20. B55 tries to read the snap count and misses, contacting A79 before the ball is snapped. Without the runoff, team A has to snap once more - with the runoff, team A wins.
-
"The story of one of the 2010 bowl games was that the offensive team apparently created an unfair clock advantage that allowed them to kick a game-tying field goal and subsequently win the game in overtime. Largely as a result of that game, the rules committee in 2011 approved a rule that deals with a team gaining a clock advantage by committing a foul late in the game. "
My memory is fuzzy regarding the exact play and situation he is talking about. Was this the UNC/Tenn game? What was the exact scenario?
-
"The story of one of the 2010 bowl games was that the offensive team apparently created an unfair clock advantage that allowed them to kick a game-tying field goal and subsequently win the game in overtime. Largely as a result of that game, the rules committee in 2011 approved a rule that deals with a team gaining a clock advantage by committing a foul late in the game. "
My memory is fuzzy regarding the exact play and situation he is talking about. Was this the UNC/Tenn game? What was the exact scenario?
Check the following thread. A youtube video is there with the last couple of plays.
http://www.refstripes.com/forum/index.php?topic=7663.0
-
Score A21-B20, 30 seconds remaining in the game, 2nd and 10 at A-20. B55 tries to read the snap count and misses, contacting A79 before the ball is snapped. Without the runoff, team A has to snap once more - with the runoff, team A wins.
Dead ball offside (by contact or interfering with offensive formation)
A dead ball sub infraction by B
Here's my logic about the 10 second runoff on B. The only time that B can actually gain an advantage is in the first 15 seconds of the play clock. If A is running the play clock down they are not going to be at the LOS until there is 10-15 seconds left. If B fouls at this point we are going to put 25 on the play clock and wind on the ready. The defense has already been penalized by this adjustment. In order for the defense to gain a clock advantage they must foul between 40 and 26 on the play clock. The only foul that I can envision would be a UNS against B with the play clock showing more that 25 seconds. All of the live ball DOF type fouls are not going to occur because the offense will not be in formation before 25 seconds. Is my logic flawed?
-
If RR was invoking 3-4-3 on this, why wouldn't he explicity say that? It makes sense to do that, but it reads like that is the enforcement regardless of time of game, 3-4-3 issues, etc.
Yes, I believe BY RULE the clock will always start on the ready. But, if you really think about it, nothing changes, in that respect. With the clock running, a FST, DOF, etc. would have seen the clock re-start on the RFP, anyway. And any pass that is thrown to conserve time becomes just that - an illegal pass to conserve time (not "intentional grounding"), so, again, by rule, the clock starts on the ready. RR puts in a "catch all" statement about any other foul with the intent of stopping the clock, but those scenarios get "stretchy," although certainly possible (e.g., a player illegally bats or kicks a ball OB to stop the clock). I can't imagine a player committing a hold during the play, with the intent of having that foul stop the clock. Picture this: A77 takes B55 to the ground, but long after the runner has passed. Then he jumps up screaming, "Hey, I was holding him - I was holding him - stop the clock!" :!#
-
Yes, I believe BY RULE the clock will always start on the ready. But, if you really think about it, nothing changes, in that respect. With the clock running, a FST, DOF, etc. would have seen the clock re-start on the RFP, anyway. And any pass that is thrown to conserve time becomes just that - an illegal pass to conserve time (not "intentional grounding"), so, again, by rule, the clock starts on the ready. RR puts in a "catch all" statement about any other foul with the intent of stopping the clock, but those scenarios get "stretchy," although certainly possible (e.g., a player illegally bats or kicks a ball OB to stop the clock). I can't imagine a player committing a hold during the play, with the intent of having that foul stop the clock. Picture this: A77 takes B55 to the ground, but long after the runner has passed. Then he jumps up screaming, "Hey, I was holding him - I was holding him - stop the clock!" :!#
That's what I was getting at with my replies. It reads like that is the enforcement EVERY time, rather than envoking 3-4-3. It would be nice to get a list of what penalties are classified as "intent of stopping the clock". Most, if not all, dead-ball fouls (FST, DOF with contact, etc.) would fall into this category, but what about the live-ball fouls??
-
Can someone help me by explaining a situation where we need a 10 second runoff against the defense? I have racked my brain and have only come up with one foul where a 10 second might be necessary. I am open to any scenarios that you can think of.
Defensive delay of game.
-
Defensive delay of game.
Disconcerting signals and Using a non-football move to force a false start fit into this category.
-
Recall the end of the Tennessee/UNC bowl game last season? Would this new rule have changed the outcome of the foul by A just before the game winning FG?
A has too many players on the field as they tried to get the special team on the field for a FG. The QB took the snap and spied the ball with :01 left, and after the penalty for illegal sub, UNc kicked the FG to win.
Would the foul lead to a run off under this new rule? I'm not sure how Illegal Sub/Part is handled in NCAA.
-
Recall the end of the Tennessee/UNC bowl game last season? Would this new rule have changed the outcome of the foul by A just before the game winning FG?
A has too many players on the field as they tried to get the special team on the field for a FG. The QB took the snap and spied the ball with :01 left, and after the penalty for illegal sub, UNc kicked the FG to win.
Would the foul lead to a run off under this new rule? I'm not sure how Illegal Sub/Part is handled in NCAA.
Yes, the new rule would result in the game ending with the 10 second subtraction. The reason is if not all of team A players get set before the snap, it shall be blown dead and called a false start, not an illegal shift as it had been in previous years. This FST then would fall under the 10 second subtraction rule.
-
But ---- the officials ruled illegal substitution rather than illegal shift. If that same call is made (illegal sub) we don't have a 10 second run off.
-
But ---- the officials ruled illegal substitution rather than illegal shift. If that same call is made (illegal sub) we don't have a 10 second run off.
But as noted in another thread previously, with the additional changes in the false start language for 2011, it would become a false start resulting in the 10 second runoff.
-
But as noted in another thread previously, with the additional changes in the false start language for 2011, it would become a false start resulting in the 10 second runoff.
Exactly. Reddings has filled this loophole and the same play would be a FST and now fall under the new 10 second subtraction rule.
-
In the UNC/Tenn bowl game, if I remember correctly, the issue was not an illegal shift, 11 players were set at the snap, but 3 or 4 players were running off the field at the same time.
That said, I think RR has closed that loophole as well. From the Too Many Players on the Field bulletin:
"Whether the snap is imminent or has just occurred, the officials shall stop the action.
2. It is very important that the officials shut the play down before or quickly after the snap if at all possible. When the offense is at fault we have been doing this very well for a number of years. But our response to defensive infractions has been less successful and certainly not as consistent."
If the game clock is running, as was the case in the bowl game, we have an illegal substitution foul that causes the clock to stop, so the 10-second run off would apply.
Thoughts?
-
RR's explanation of the new rule read "Starting in 2011, it is a false start if the offensive team is shifting when the ball is made ready for play and has not stopped for a full second before the ball is snapped." It remains open for interpretation what ".... offensive team is shifting ... " is going to mean until the final language in the rule is determined. I'm not sure how we decide there's "11 players set for a second" when there's 14 or 15 "players" on the field with some subset of them attempting to leave the field. Also, IMO a close look at the actual video would confirm that at no time were there 11 players fully set for 1 second prior to the snap on the subject play.
-
RR's explanation of the new rule read "Starting in 2011, it is a false start if the offensive team is shifting when the ball is made ready for play and has not stopped for a full second before the ball is snapped." It remains open for interpretation what ".... offensive team is shifting ... " is going to mean until the final language in the rule is determined. I'm not sure how we decide there's "11 players set for a second" when there's 14 or 15 "players" on the field with some subset of them attempting to leave the field. Also, IMO a close look at the actual video would confirm that at no time were there 11 players fully set for 1 second prior to the snap on the subject play.
There doesn't need to be 11 players set for a second, but ALL players. There were more than 11 out there, then subs running in, and others running out. This rule would have covered the play. The clinic I was just at was lead by Rick Kruger, who was the H for the game. LeMonnier said specifically that it would have covered the play in Rick's game.
-
There doesn't need to be 11 players set for a second, but ALL players. There were more than 11 out there, then subs running in, and others running out. This rule would have covered the play. The clinic I was just at was lead by Rick Kruger, who was the H for the game. LeMonnier said specifically that it would have covered the play in Rick's game.
But let's change it a bit - assume the 11 players (which include the incoming subs) ARE set for a second, but the outgoing players "replaced players" are trying to run off the field at the snap - and all of this occurs after the ball was made ready for play, meaning it was put down by the U. What now?
-
Don't RR's 2011 clarifications cover this with the guidance that now says if we've got more than 11 on the field we kill the play immediately even if the ball has been snapped? So we would still have the clock stopping due to a foul (Illegal Substitution), and have the ten second run-off.
-
Don't RR's 2011 clarifications cover this with the guidance that now says if we've got more than 11 on the field we kill the play immediately even if the ball has been snapped? So we would still have the clock stopping due to a foul (Illegal Substitution), and have the ten second run-off.
Agreed.
BTW, for some reason (maybe to be different from the NFL), our rule is called a 10 second subtraction.
-
Don't RR's 2011 clarifications cover this with the guidance that now says if we've got more than 11 on the field we kill the play immediately even if the ball has been snapped? So we would still have the clock stopping due to a foul (Illegal Substitution), and have the ten second run-off.
I've read RR's clarification and, I'm sorry, but I do not see a direct reference requiring us to shut it down if the replaced A players are trying to get off the field and don't make it before the snap. Can someone enlighten me please?
-
From one of the earlier postings (April 12th):
Rule 3-5-3 More Than Eleven Players on the Field
a. Team A may not break the huddle with more than 11 players nor keep more than 11 players in the huddle or in a formation for more than three seconds. Officials shall stop the action whether or not the ball has been snapped.
The new wording if it ends up in the rule book effectively eliminates the illegal participation language and instructs us to shut down the play if there is more than 11 players on the field before or after the snap. The original posting with all of RR's explanation is attached.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
From one of the earlier postings (April 12th):
Rule 3-5-3 More Than Eleven Players on the Field
a. Team A may not break the huddle with more than 11 players nor keep more than 11 players in the huddle or in a formation for more than three seconds. Officials shall stop the action whether or not the ball has been snapped.
The new wording if it ends up in the rule book effectively eliminates the illegal participation language and instructs us to shut down the play if there is more than 11 players on the field before or after the snap. The original posting with all of RR's explanation is attached.
I've read that posting and to me it doesn't cover the situation where the replaced players are racing to get off the field. 3-5-3-a talks about breaking the huddle which doesn't apply to my example and the in formation for more than 3 seconds doesn't apply either so I don't see how that rule applies to my example. Perhaps an official interpretation will have us shut it down but RR's examples did not describe this play.
And that surprises me - why not give a play example exactly like this situation as it occurs not that infrequently? Again, there was no huddle and and there was no formation for more than 3 seconds.
-
I agree zebra99, it doesn't specifically state that if team A fails to get players in excess of 11 off the field prior to the snap that we shut it down. And unless there is an editorial change to 3-5-2-b, making it a dead ball foul, RR would have to make an interpretation instructing us to shut it down.
-
I agree zebra99, it doesn't specifically state that if team A fails to get players in excess of 11 off the field prior to the snap that we shut it down. And unless there is an editorial change to 3-5-2-b, making it a dead ball foul, RR would have to make an interpretation instructing us to shut it down.
agree and 3-5-2-b applis only to the defense, so it would have to be a change to or in addition to 3-5-2-a.
-
3-5-2-a is about entering the field while ball is in play and 3-5-2-b is about leaving the field while the ball is in play. I don't see where either of these sections apply only to one team.
-
IMO RR's overall explanation in the full posting for new rule 3-5-3 he makes the "intent" extremely clear in that if we are aware that there are 11-plus on the field for either team and the ball is snapped then we should kill the play immediately. As noted previously, it remains to be seen exactly what new/revised rule language and AR's make it into the actual 2011 rulebook to implement that intent.
-
3-5-2-a is about entering the field while ball is in play and 3-5-2-b is about leaving the field while the ball is in play. I don't see where either of these sections apply only to one team.
Hawkeye - now you have me totally confused (not that hard to do) - you cite 3-5-2 a and b. RR's changes are to 3-5-3 a and b. 3-5-2-b in the rule book specifically states "live-ball foul."
I'm talking about RR's brand new 3-5-3 and subparagraph b refers only to Team B.
-
IMO RR's overall explanation in the full posting for new rule 3-5-3 he makes the "intent" extremely clear in that if we are aware that there are 11-plus on the field for either team and the ball is snapped then we should kill the play immediately. As noted previously, it remains to be seen exactly what new/revised rule language and AR's make it into the actual 2011 rulebook to implement that intent.
It seems to me that the wording Rogers used was meant to emphasize that if an official detects a violation of 3-5-3 a and b prior to the snap, then the play is to be shut down whether the snap gets off or not.
I have no reason to believe that anything has changed with respect to AR 3-5-2I, which we've always used to make it a live ball foul when the 12th player is running toward the sideline at the snap and he was not in the huddle when it broke nor in the huddle or the formation for more than 3 seconds.
-
IMO RR's overall explanation in the full posting for new rule 3-5-3 he makes the "intent" extremely clear in that if we are aware that there are 11-plus on the field for either team and the ball is snapped then we should kill the play immediately. As noted previously, it remains to be seen exactly what new/revised rule language and AR's make it into the actual 2011 rulebook to implement that intent.
I hope that's the intent - but how hard is it to write a rule which clearly states it by simply working into new rule 3-5-3-b, Team A?
Anyway, it ain't that "extremely" clear to me!
-
A side issue.
How do we define/determine "the snap is imminent"?
Is it when the snapper has his hands on the ball or below his knees or is just standing upright over the ball?
Does the position and/or posture of the QB influence the determination?
-
Hawkeye - now you have me totally confused (not that hard to do) - you cite 3-5-2 a and b. RR's changes are to 3-5-3 a and b. 3-5-2-b in the rule book specifically states "live-ball foul."
I'm talking about RR's brand new 3-5-3 and subparagraph b refers only to Team B.
Sorry for the confusion, We don't know what the new 3-5-2 will look like in the light of the new section 3-5-3, but currently (2010 rules) 3-5-2-b covers the case of a player racing to get off the field (team A or B) and specifically states it is a live ball foul. I was saying that RR could make an editorial change to the current 3-5-2-b changing it to a dead ball foul if he hasn't gotten off the field when the ball is snapped thus covering the case that you are concerned about. But we'll have to see.
Perhaps someone close to RR can give him this scenario stating the perceived oversight and see what RR thinks of it.
-
Sorry for the confusion, We don't know what the new 3-5-2 will look like in the light of the new section 3-5-3, but currently (2010 rules) 3-5-2-b covers the case of a player racing to get off the field (team A or B) and specifically states it is a live ball foul. I was saying that RR could make an editorial change to the current 3-5-2-b changing it to a dead ball foul if he hasn't gotten off the field when the ball is snapped thus covering the case that you are concerned about. But we'll have to see.
Perhaps someone close to RR can give him this scenario stating the perceived oversight and see what RR thinks of it.
NACFO had access to RR and Dave Parry, but ... alas...may NACFO rest in peace. :) Now we must go through our supervisors.
-
LeMonnier did the rules at the clinic I was at and he had been in a detailed discussion with Rogers and said this is still to be a live ball foul.
-
Ok so back to the original few posts in this thread...
If the game clock is running and the offended team accepts the yardage penalty but declines the 10-second runoff, we still start the game clock on the snap (even though that's not specifically stated in the rule)?
-
Ok so back to the original few posts in this thread...
If the game clock is running and the offended team accepts the yardage penalty but declines the 10-second runoff, we still start the game clock on the snap (even though that's not specifically stated in the rule)?
Check Play situation 4 in the related Bulletin. If the offended teams takes the yardage penalty, but declines the time subtraction, the clock starts on the snap. If the yardage penalty (and, thus, the time subtraction) is declined, the clock starts on the snap. So, by these rulings, the only time it starts on the RFP signal is when the offended team takes BOTH the yardage and time subtraction.
-
I have no reason to believe that anything has changed with respect to AR 3-5-2I, which we've always used to make it a live ball foul when the 12th player is running toward the sideline at the snap and he was not in the huddle when it broke nor in the huddle or the formation for more than 3 seconds.
AR 3-5-2-I reads:
Any player(s), in excess of 11, obviously is withdrawing but has not reached a boundary line when the ball is put in play and he does not interfere with play or players. RULING: Penalty—Five yards from the previous spot (Rules 7-1-3-b Penalty and 7-1-4-b Penalty).
What is the significance in citing 7-1-3-b Penalty and 7-1-4-b Penalty? What bearing do those rules have on the play in the AR?
-
AR 3-5-2-I reads:
Any player(s), in excess of 11, obviously is withdrawing but has not reached a boundary line when the ball is put in play and he does not interfere with play or players. RULING: Penalty—Five yards from the previous spot (Rules 7-1-3-b Penalty and 7-1-4-b Penalty).
What is the significance in citing 7-1-3-b Penalty and 7-1-4-b Penalty? What bearing do those rules have on the play in the AR?
None that I can think of, however, those penalties seem to specify that fouls before the snap (FST, etc) are penalized from the "succeeding spot" and fouls at the snap are live ball fouls and penalized from the "previous spot". Since AR 3-5-2I notes the penalty as "previous spot", then I think we can conclude that the foul for replaced players not getting off the field at the snap is a live ball foul.
-
I still believe from the language in the new 3-5-3 that Hawkeye's previous comment is where this will end up:
..... I was saying that RR could make an editorial change to the current 3-5-2-b changing it to a dead ball foul if he hasn't gotten off the field when the ball is snapped ......
-
Is it accurate to say that anytime we have players/subs/replaced players of A trying to get off the field that we shut it down for illegal substitution, regardless of who was set and when? Just need a scenario when we would have Team A players trying to get off the field and we'd let it go as a live-ball IS.
-
Is it accurate to say that anytime we have players/subs/replaced players of A trying to get off the field that we shut it down for illegal substitution, regardless of who was set and when?
I don't think we can use "anytime" as a guideline - it's possible that A didn't break the huddle with more than 11, nor keep more than 11 in formation for more than 3 seconds, and the 12th player is trying to get off the field - to me that's a live ball foul. I beleive we'll hear from RR that he wants it that way.
-
I agree that "always" is a slippery slope. I just wish it were that easy.
We've all had this happen at one time or another...So for example you have 11 break the huddle (or maybe no-huddle) and head to the line of scrimmage. Thinking the offense only has 10 on the field, a coach sends the 12th player out there. The coach or 12th player then correctly counts and realizes he's #12. So he immediately turns and runs back toward the sideline. He doesn't get off in time at the snap.
Does the following sound correct?
Scenario 1: If all 11 had set for one second before #12 entered the field, then he didn't get off in time then we have a live-ball illegal substitution (or illegal shift?).
Scenario 2: The offense is hustling to the line (not set) when 12 comes running out, then if he doesn't get off in time we have a dead-ball false start, even if the original eleven got set at the line for once second before 12 made it off.
-
I don't think we can use "anytime" as a guideline - it's possible that A didn't break the huddle with more than 11, nor keep more than 11 in formation for more than 3 seconds, and the 12th player is trying to get off the field - to me that's a live ball foul. I believe we'll hear from RR that he wants it that way.
That doesn't seem to reconcile with the somewhat ambiguous wording in the proposed 3-5-3-c that reads: If officials do not detect the excessive number of players until during the down or after the down is over, the infraction is treated as a live-ball foul.
That pretty clearly seems to imply that if we do detect the excessive number of players prior to "during the down" that we have a whistle at the snap and a dead ball foul. In any case the changes posted so far and the existing rules that overlap appear to require some fine-tuning. As noted, we'll just have to wait and see the rest of the story when the final version comes out.
-
We've all had this happen at one time or another...So for example you have 11 break the huddle (or maybe no-huddle) and head to the line of scrimmage. Thinking the offense only has 10 on the field, a coach sends the 12th player out there. The coach or 12th player then correctly counts and realizes he's #12. So he immediately turns and runs back toward the sideline. He doesn't get off in time at the snap.
Perhaps there is insight from Play 9 in 2010 Bulletin 3.
The ball is dead following a play that resulted in a first down at the B-40. Eleven players of Team A, which runs a no-huddle offense, are going to their various spread-offense positions in preparation for the next play. The ball is ready for play when A22 runs onto the field from his team area, and after he passes the top of the numbers, he or the coaching staff apparently realizes that he is the 12th player. He then turns and runs back to his team area. The ball has not been snapped.
RULING: Dead-ball foul for a substitution infraction. By interpretation A22 has become a player by entering his team’s “effective huddle” and thus must remain in the game for one play. Five-yard penalty. Team A will have first and 15 at the B-45. (2-27-9-b, 3-5-2-d).
The ruling for this Play is in contrast to the wordings of the present 3-5-2-d and AR 3-5-2-VI.
-
Ok so back to the original few posts in this thread...
If the game clock is running and the offended team accepts the yardage penalty but declines the 10-second runoff, we still start the game clock on the snap (even though that's not specifically stated in the rule)?
I'm also having a hard time understanding the start the clock on the snap part of the Ruling to play situation 4. If the game clock is running and team A false starts, why are we going to start on the snap if the 10-second subtraction part of penalty is declined? Isn't that giving team team A what they want? Or because team B declines the 10 second subtraction part only if they need to get the ball, we start on the snap thus conserving time?
There is nothing I see in the new 3-5-3 that states that the clock starts on the snap if the 10-second subtraction part of the penalty is declined, so is this some weird reverse use of 3-4-3? In other words, team A is conserving time when they foul (intentionally or unintentionally), team B is OK with that because they want as much time as possible if they are going to get the ball back, so they decline the 10-second subtraction, then we start on the snap giving team B the advantage of team A fouling.
-
I'm also having a hard time understanding the start the clock on the snap part of the Ruling to play situation 4. If the game clock is running and team A false starts, why are we going to start on the snap if the 10-second subtraction part of penalty is declined? Isn't that giving team team A what they want? Or because team B declines the 10 second subtraction part only if they need to get the ball, we start on the snap thus conserving time?
There is nothing I see in the new 3-5-3 that states that the clock starts on the snap if the 10-second subtraction part of the penalty is declined, so is this some weird reverse use of 3-4-3? In other words, team A is conserving time when they foul (intentionally or unintentionally), team B is OK with that because they want as much time as possible if they are going to get the ball back, so they decline the 10-second subtraction, then we start on the snap giving team B the advantage of team A fouling.
Yes, this is a use of 3-4-3, but nothing weird at all about it.
This is nothing more than we would have done last year without a 10 second subtraction. Last year if team A committed a false start under one minute and they would have gained an advantage by starting the clock on the ready then the referee would have invoked 3-4-3 and started the clock on the snap.
Here, if team B declines the 10 second subtraction, then they obviously want as much time on the clock as possible, which, under any plausible scenario, infers that team A would gain an advantage if the clock starts. Therefore, *ALWAYS* start the clock on the snap if team B declines the 10 second subtraction.