Timing

[Stinterp]

2/10 from the A-25,  :50 remaining in the 4 th period.  Running back runs to the A-30 and is tackled out of bounds.  There is an illegal formation foul accepted on the play. Is clock status now on the ready or snap?

[Kalle]

The game clock was stopped both to complete the penalty and for the runner out of bounds. As we are in the last two minutes of the game the latter causes the game clock to be started on the snap, and this overrides the penalty completion (which would be on the ready).

[ElvisLives]

The game clock was stopped both to complete the penalty and for the runner out of bounds. As we are in the last two minutes of the game the latter causes the game clock to be started on the snap, and this overrides the penalty completion (which would be on the ready).

***Deleted my original post. I stand corrected. Don't know what I was thinking.***

[Legacy Zebra]

In this case, Kalle is correct because the “other reason” is going out of bounds, not a first down. So the clock would be on the snap anyway. The offended team does not have the option to make the clock run on the RFP if it is already on the snap.

[JasonTX]

Kalle,
Your ruling is a possibility, but, we need to know the score. The clock status depends upon which team is ahead in score. If the fouling team is ahead in score during the last 2 minutes of the 2nd or 4th periods, the offended team has the option to start the clock on the snap, or on the referee's signal.
AR 3-4-3-VI contains a scenario in which, during the last 2 minutes the second period, the clock is stopped for a first down, and there is a foul by Team A, who is AHEAD in score. The AR ruling for this scenario states that Team B (the offended team) has the option to start the game clock on the snap, or on the referee's signal. So, 'another reason for stopping the clock' does NOT trump when the game clock starts. It does trump a possible 10-second subtraction when we are inside one minute (which has its own clock management rules). But, in the absence of a 10SS, the "under 2-minutes" provision of 3-4-3 governs.

What if it was an incomplete pass instead of a runner out of bounds?

[Stinterp]

AR 3-4-3-VI is for a runner in bounds, I believe.  This runner was out of bounds.
Regarding incomplete pass,  what would the clock status be if this play happenend in the middle of the 3rd period?

[ElvisLives]

What if it was an incomplete pass instead of a runner out of bounds?

***See my retraction above.***

[bossman72]

I'm really surprised there are 6 replies to this already.  This seems pretty straight forward that the clock is on the snap at any time in the game.  What am I missing?

[Kalle]

I'm really surprised there are 6 replies to this already.  This seems pretty straight forward that the clock is on the snap at any time in the game.  What am I missing?

Outside the last two minutes of a half the game clock would start on the ready as neither of the causes to stop the clock would start the clock on the snap. So, not entirely straightforward

[NVFOA_Ump]

I'm really surprised there are 6 replies to this already.  This seems pretty straight forward that the clock is on the snap at any time in the game.  What am I missing?

True for NFHS rules but this is the NCAA thread?   

[ElvisLives]

I may retract my retraction.

AR 3-4-3-VI (b) gives us a secondary reason that the game clock stopped (in addition to the holding foul). And then it tells us that Team B has the option to have the game clock start on the snap OR the referee's signal. If the alternate reason that the game clock was stopped - whether out of bounds, incomplete pass, a score, etc. - is to govern, then why would the AR ruling indicate that Team B (the offended team, behind in score) would have the option to start the game clock on the snap or on the referee's signal? By the logic that the alternate reason governs, Team B would not have an option, thus, the game clock must start on the referee's signal. But that is not what the AR says. Granted, the offended team, behind in score, would rarely, if ever, choose to start the game clock on the referee's signal, but the AR gives them the option. (A team grossly behind in score might want to get the game over with, and start the clock on the ready.)

So, in the case of the BC going OB and a live-ball foul by the team ahead in score, I contend that the offended team, behind in score, would have the option to start the game clock on the snap, or on the referee's signal. The rule language only says that if the game clock is stopped to complete a penalty - it does not say ONLY to complete a penalty (as it does for a potential 10SS).

I say they have the option.
 

[Kalle]

AR 3-4-3-VI (b) gives us a secondary reason that the game clock stopped (in addition to the holding foul). And then it tells us that Team B has the option to have the game clock start on the snap OR the referee's signal. If the alternate reason that the game clock was stopped - whether out of bounds, incomplete pass, a score, etc. - is to govern, then why would the AR ruling indicate that Team B (the offended team, behind in score) would have the option to start the game clock on the snap or on the referee's signal? By the logic that the alternate reason governs, Team B would not have an option, thus, the game clock must start on the referee's signal. But that is not what the AR says. Granted, the offended team, behind in score, would rarely, if ever, choose to start the game clock on the referee's signal, but the AR gives them the option. (A team grossly behind in score might want to get the game over with, and start the clock on the ready.)

You do - as always - have a very valid point. I contend, however, that with the current rule language the option only applies for when the other reason(s) is one that would cause the clock to start on the ready. "If the game clock is stopped to complete a penalty for a foul by the team ahead in the score (or either team if the score is tied) inside the last two minutes of a half, it will start on the snap, at the option of the offended team." The rule does not specify that there is an option to start on the ready, only the option to start on the snap.

Then again, with my track record anticipating the JA/RR/SS rulings, I'm willing to bet that your interpretation is what SS wants...

[bossman72]

True for NFHS rules but this is the NCAA thread?   

Yep, exactly that.  Wrong section!

Even under 2, what's the catch?

[bossman72]

I may retract my retraction.

AR 3-4-3-VI (b) gives us a secondary reason that the game clock stopped (in addition to the holding foul). And then it tells us that Team B has the option to have the game clock start on the snap OR the referee's signal. If the alternate reason that the game clock was stopped - whether out of bounds, incomplete pass, a score, etc. - is to govern, then why would the AR ruling indicate that Team B (the offended team, behind in score) would have the option to start the game clock on the snap or on the referee's signal? By the logic that the alternate reason governs, Team B would not have an option, thus, the game clock must start on the referee's signal. But that is not what the AR says. Granted, the offended team, behind in score, would rarely, if ever, choose to start the game clock on the referee's signal, but the AR gives them the option. (A team grossly behind in score might want to get the game over with, and start the clock on the ready.)

So, in the case of the BC going OB and a live-ball foul by the team ahead in score, I contend that the offended team, behind in score, would have the option to start the game clock on the snap, or on the referee's signal. The rule language only says that if the game clock is stopped to complete a penalty - it does not say ONLY to complete a penalty (as it does for a potential 10SS).

I say they have the option.
 

First off, the rule is terribly written.  Not Rogers' best work.  Why he wrote it as "stopping the clock to complete a penalty" instead of just "committing a foul" is beyond me.

Spirit of the rule.  I remember the play that caused the rule change and I remember what they were trying to prevent with the new rule.  They didn't want the offense to foul and suck another 25 seconds off of the clock and gain a timing advantage by fouling. 

What they didn't want to happen was have a stopped clock go to running.  Sure, you can lawyerize this rule and read into it what you want, but they never intended for a stopped clock to go to running.

[NVFOA_Ump]

IMHO FI 3-4-3-VI does not apply here since it is specifically for a play that ends in bounds with the clock running.  Where do we get language that gives B a clock option following a penalty enforcement when the primary reason for the game clock being stopped was not the flag?

[ElvisLives]

IMHO FI 3-4-3-VI does not apply here since it is specifically for a play that ends in bounds with the clock running.  Where do we get language that gives B a clock option following a penalty enforcement when the primary reason for the game clock being stopped was not the flag?

Uh, 3-4-3 has that language. The fourth sentence. Unlike the 10-second subtraction associated with the helmet off rule and the injury rule, which specifically state, "...is the only reason for stopping the clock...," 3-4-3 only states, "If the game clock is stopped to complete a penalty for a foul by the team ahead in the score..."  Then it goes on to say that the clock will start on the snap, at the OPTION of the offended team.

AR 3-4-3-VI has two parts. One in which the clock is running and is only stopped due to the completion of the penalty. The other - the one to which I refer - has Team A reaching their line-to-gain, which provides an alternate, or, perhaps, 'primary,' as you say, reason for the clock to stop (in addition to the completion of the penalty). The ruling allows the offended team, behind in score, to have the game clock start on the snap at their OPTION.

If the intent is to give the offended team this option only if the game clock would otherwise start on the referee's signal, why doesn't the rule say that? Not exactly rocket science. Heck I can even do that:
"If the game clock is stopped to complete a penalty for a foul by the team ahead in the score (or either team if the score is tied) inside then last two minutes of a half, and, by rule, the game clock would otherwise next start on the referee's signal, the offended team shall have the option to have the game clock next start on the snap."

But, it doesn't say that. Redding & Shaw are smart people. If that was their intent, I believe it would say so. Otherwise, with AR 3-4-3 (b), I believe the offended team can have the clock started either on the snap or the referee's signal, at their option, regardless of the alternate reason for the game clock to stop.

If the score is tied, I can easily see the offended team wanting the game clock to run, especially if they are on defense, and they would like the half to end, to keep Team A from having time to score.

[NVFOA_Ump]

AR 3-4-3-VI has two parts. One in which the clock is running and is only stopped due to the completion of the penalty. The other - the one to which I refer - has Team A reaching their line-to-gain, which provides an alternate, or, perhaps, 'primary,' as you say, reason for the clock to stop (in addition to the completion of the penalty). The ruling allows the offended team, behind in score, to have the game clock start on the snap at their OPTION.

If the intent is to give the offended team this option only if the game clock would otherwise start on the referee's signal, why doesn't the rule say that? Not exactly rocket science. Heck I can even do that:
"If the game clock is stopped to complete a penalty for a foul by the team ahead in the score (or either team if the score is tied) inside then last two minutes of a half, and, by rule, the game clock would otherwise next start on the referee's signal, the offended team shall have the option to have the game clock next start on the snap."

But, it doesn't say that. Redding & Shaw are smart people. If that was their intent, I believe it would say so. Otherwise, with AR 3-4-3 (b), I believe the offended team can have the clock started either on the snap or the referee's signal, at their option, regardless of the alternate reason for the game clock to stop.

If the score is tied, I can easily see the offended team wanting the game clock to run, especially if they are on defense, and they would like the half to end, to keep Team A from having time to score.

I disagree and I'm not seeing the problem.  FI's are not supposed to be further interpreted to plays where the initial facts are different and IMHO stopping for the primary reason of runner OB is very different than for stopping for a 1st down.

In FI 3-4-3-VI both parts apply to plays where the reason that the clock stopped would subsequently have the clock start on the ready.  Are we saying that we "borrow" that last
sentence and apply it to a play where the reason the clock stopped would subsequently have the clock start on the snap?