Erroneous line-to-gain

[ElvisLives]

Really interesting situation from another forum. What would we do? My paraphrased situation:

Team A advances for a first down at the B-6. After the ball is dead, A33 taunts B55, and is flagged by the back judge. After the penalty from the dead-ball spot, the ball is spotted at the B-21. Incorrectly thinking the line-to-gain is the goal line, the chains are not set for this new scrimmage series. Team A snaps the ball for first down and A33 advances to the B-14. While spotting the ball for second down, the crew realizes that the chains should have been set at the previous spot, with 1/10 from the B-21.

What next (for NCAA)?

I don’t have an authoritative answer. By rule, we CAN correct the down number any time during the scrimmage series. But, can we establish - or reposition - the line-to-gain after the ball has been snapped for a series?

If we, retroactively, set the line-to-gain at the correct spot (and set the chains), what harm has been done? Well, in this specific circumstance, maybe no harm. But, let’s say A33 advanced to the B-10, which would have been beyond the proper line-to-gain, for a new series. But, instead, now they are playing 2nd/goal from the B-10.
How far can we let this go?

Personally, without guidance from above, I would correct the line-to-gain until I couldn’t, anymore. If I know the starting yard line, by on-field knowledge, or with replay assistance, until they advance beyond the proper line-to-gain, we can set the chains, with minimal harm done. But, if they advance beyond the proper line-to-gain, and then snap the ball, IMHO, we can’t fix anything, and we have to let the “1st/goal” series play out.

Either way, we’re in deep doo-doo.

Don’t let this happen.

[ljudge]

I am an RO, and whenever we have an accepted penalty, I always verbalize the enforcement, new los/ltg after enforcement, etc., and my RC partner confirms what I'm saying.  When I got hired as an RC, my supervisor told me to always, ALWAYS check the chains on every new series and say something if anything appears incorrect.  If we see something awry, he gets on the O2O immediately, communicates the anomaly, and never lets it get to this point.  Our crew is on board with "crew of 9" (or 10 when we have a C).

[ElvisLives]

I am an RO, and whenever we have an accepted penalty, I always verbalize the enforcement, new los/ltg after enforcement, etc., and my RC partner confirms what I'm saying.  When I got hired as an RC, my supervisor told me to always, ALWAYS check the chains on every new series and say something if anything appears incorrect.  If we see something awry, he gets on the O2O immediately, communicates the anomaly, and never lets it get to this point.  Our crew is on board with "crew of 9" (or 10 when we have a C).

 

[bossman72]

I would say make it what it's supposed to be within reason.  Where it gets tricky is when play calls are done assuming the LTG is X yards away or we are currently on X down.  Those are really hard to fix. 

I saw a game (I think it was an Alabama game) a number of years ago where the runner was tackled right at the LTG.  The crew didn't give them the first down right away but they eventually did.  Alabama then runs a QB sneak thinking it was 3rd or 4th and inches when in reality it was 1st and 10.  Now they go to 2nd and 9 after the sneak and play the rest of the drive. 

NFHS rules make you go all the way back and undo every down after the down box and LTG get messed up, by rule.  I don't think we have to go that far, but we should just do the common sense thing.  Whatever you rule likely will not make both teams happy.

[Ralph Damren]

A few years back the NFHS published a long-winded account of what to do if the down was incorrect. The air was soon filled with 'what ifs'. 

The following year a proposal was submitted to correct improper chain placement. It was even more complex.

I recalled a situation that occurred a couple of years prior that lead in it's defeat....

SCENE: 1st & 10 at B's 15....little time left, A inhurry-up offence.

ACT I: A rushes up to LOS and snaps ball BEFORE RFP 

ACT II: Ball moved back to B's 20 -1st & 15 

ACT III: A turns the ball over on downs at B's 8 

ACT IV: AFTER the game, it was realized that where the came before the RFP on a new series, the stakes should have been reset with line to gain being B's 10. That would have given A 1st & goal.

EPILOGE : It was our general feeling that if we published 100 'what ifs' , #101 would occur and the puzzle would continue.  . IMHO, NFHS would apply 1-1-6 (God rule) with the white hat applying what was fair. I assume NCAA has a simular provision.

[ElvisLives]

IMHO, NFHS would apply 1-1-6 (God rule) with the white hat applying what was fair. I assume NCAA has a simular provision.

There was a time when Rule 11 specifically gave the Referee "...general oversight and control of the game...", and "...his decisions upon rules and other matters pertaining to the game...", were final. Then they decided to just reference the CCA manual for officiating, and removed that specific language from the rule book, itself. And you would think they would have simply moved that language to somewhere in the manual.

I can't find it (anywhere, rule book or manual.)

Rule 5-9 says that no rule decision can be changed after the next time the ball is put in play, or the second/fourth period ends.
9-2-3-c gives the R the ability to take any action he considers 'equitable' to address any obviously unfair acts (by game participants).
And 9-4-3 gives the R "broad authority in timing of the game."

The language of "...general oversight and control of the game..." is nowhere to be found. But, IMHO, that still exists, for the Referee, whether in print, or not.

In this erroneous line-to-gain situation, I believe the NCAA leadership would want the R to step up and make some attempt to restore the game to the conditions that it should be, if he can. Until Team A advances the ball to/beyond the B-11, set the chains where they need to be.
If the correct line-to-gain had been established before 1st down, and that would have affected Team A's play calling, well, sorry. That's just life. Humans make mistakes. They will be held accountable. But this is no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.   

[Imperial Stout]

This reminds me of this incident from the Sugar Bowl.

2Q 12:38 1-10 B-18
Team A advances to the B-5. UNS on Team A.  Ball marked ready for play and snapped at the B-20 with the chains laying on the ground.

There was a short crew discussion holding up the snap, and the H had a short word with a coach who approached him and didn't seem all that bothered, so there must have been something else going on. Though, in any case, the chains were on the ground announcing to the world this is a "goal to go" situation. The LTG would have been nicely painted on the field as the 10 yard line, so not that difficult in that respect.

Team A scored on their 2nd play without taking a snap inside the 10.

2Q 12:38 on the clock or about the 51:24 mark in the video.
https://youtu.be/ivAMWt7QNXE?si=nf1jGX1ZtrkLj9mS&t=3084