Penalty to 9-1-16b

[alter mann]

Can this be true?
Auto first down for a foul by team A?
Or what am I missing?

[TXMike]

Yes penalty statement should be tweaked to say "for Team B fouls" and to include the unsportsmanlike conduct signal but why go to all that trouble when they might as well remove 9-1-16-b fr4om the book since it is NEVER called

[NVFOA_Ump]

The penalty statement applies to both 9-1-16-a and 9-1-16-b fouls (PENALTY [a-b]).  Simple common sense dictates that Team A can't be awarded an automatic first down if the foul is a 9-1-16-b Team A USC foul .

[TXMike]

The point is there is at least 1 other place where penalty statement specifically states 1st down for B fouls so why not here?  It is just as logical in the other sectin

[Andrew McCarthy]

It seems like (b) should be swapped with (c).  Both penalty statements would make sense.

[FabioBroncos]

Hey Mike, never say never when Brazil and our actor-players are in the mix for the rules...