All good except are we sure this qualifies for a 10 second run off. The clock stopped at the end of the play because of the incomplete pass -- not because of the foul. Now, if the second pass was complete and the receiver was tackled in bounds and shorts of the line to gain ---- and you had a flag for the ILP -- then the 10 second run off would apply.
DallasLJ,
3-4-4-a lists specific items that qualify for the 10-second subtraction. The fourth item in that list is an incomplete illegal forward pass.
Now, I will grant you that the specific scenario that this item was intended to cover is when an A player simply throws the ball forward (first forward pass of the down) while beyond the NZ (but short of the LTG), because he knows he is out of T/Os and needs to get the clock stopped (and the pass is incomplete). It wasn't necessarily written to cover a second forward pass (which may have been intended to be a legal pass, but they botched the first pass). But, a second forward pass might just as easily fit the model of this rule, e.g., a receiver catches a legal forward pass, advances, but, short of the line-to-gain, and with no T/Os remaining, he throws it toward a teammate beyond him, but it falls incomplete.
I will add that, with any INCOMPLETE illegal forward pass, the clock stops because it is both an incomplete forward pass, and a foul. One can argue chicken-or-egg in these cases, but the fact that Team A committed a foul that directly
and immediately resulted in the clock being stopped (deliberate or unintentional), it will qualify for the 10-second subtraction.
Some may want to argue that the foul occurred when the pass was released, so the foul did not immediately stop the clock. However, that is not correct. The foul can not occur until the pass officially becomes a "forward" pass, which can't happen until it touches something beyond the yard line from which it was thrown. Yes, it could become forward - and a foul - before it becomes incomplete, by touching a player or an official. But the time differential between that moment and when it becomes incomplete would be inconsequential.
Bottom line: If it is an incomplete illegal forward pass, or intentional grounding and the pass is incomplete, it qualifies for the 10-second subtraction.
Want to open a can of worms? How about an incomplete illegal forward pass by Team B during the final minute of a half? The same rule applies. But, why would B need to commit a foul to stop the clock, since it will stop at the end of the down, anyway? I can't really answer that, because the BC could always just fall down to stop the clock. So, why give up yards by committing a foul? It most likely wouldn't be intentional. Most likely an errant attempt at a backward pass, that goes forward and falls incomplete. Still qualifies for 3-4-4.
Another anomaly: Intentional grounding, but the pass is complete. As much as I hate the interpretation, if the team A passer throws the ball to an ineligible teammate (deliberately or otherwise) - and there is no eligible A player in the area - that is still "intentional grounding," but the ball continues in play, so the clock doesn't stop. So, the 10-second subtraction doesn't apply. That makes sense, since they gained no clock advantage by the pass being complete, and play continuing. (PS I'd prefer to see this NOT be intentional grounding, but simply illegal touching. But, I'm not in charge.)
