Quote:
Originally posted by Mike Simonds
I don't agree with you. The final result of the play is the determining factor. If you read rule 10-4-5-d, the spot of enforcement would be B's 20 (the succeeding spot) if the final result of the play was a touchback. In this case the final result of the play was not a touchback.
That is why you must ask yourself this question: What would happen if B declines A's foul? The final result of the play would be A's ball first and goal at B's 2 yard line.
Therefore, if B accepts A's foul, you must apply rule 10-5-2. The end of B's run is in B's end zone, and there was a foul by A during the down prior to a change of possession (A's recovery of the fumble).
|
Mike,
I agree 10-4-5d can not apply because the play did not result in a touchback. And while I agree 10-5-2 is the most equitable spot, it can not apply for the same reason. The play would not result in a safety either. Under the current rules, the only enforcement I see is 10-4-4 where the end of the run is the loose ball spot (10-3-3b). 10-3-3a does not apply because the runner was not in possession.
I know I am going to catch the rath of Bob for saying this - but the casebook Page 82 *10.4.5 Sit H supports this idea.
This begs the next "WHAT IF" - B looses possession 7 yards deep in the EZ - the loose ball rolls OB at the 2 - A commits a 5 yard facemask. Would this result in a touchback?
All of that said, I do not feel there is a rule written that adequately addresses this situation! And agree with Bob, the interpretation does not completely address it either.
EDITORIAL: I think Rule 10-5-2 should be changed to read "... or if the loose ball spot is the end zone and the play does not result in a touchback."
[Edited by dumbref on Nov 16th, 2003 at 06:31 PM]