View Single Post
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 21, 2009, 08:52am
Robert Goodman Robert Goodman is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadioBlue View Post
The spirit of the all-but-one principle is to give the non-offending team (A) the benefit of any yards gained without the benefit of an illegal act. If a PF by A happens 40 yards behind the play, how can that illegal act be of any benefit to the scoring team? Did it allow for his team to score? No. The only reason this unsporting act is a PF is because contact was involved. But, really, this isn't a football play. This is an unsporting act that we, as officials, must flag as a PF because of that contact.

By the letter of the law, I understand this is a spot foul. By spirit and intent when looking at the rules as an entire body, I have difficulty in justifying the negating of a score and assessing what amounts to a 50+ yard penalty.

Granted, I'm not the one that made the stupid hit. But, certainly, the punishment does not jive with the spirit of the all-but-one principle.
That's true, and if you can get away with it (i.e. the sequence of events wasn't obvious to everyone), you can correct for the deficiency of the letter of the rule w.r.t. its spirit. Otherwise what's needed is a rule change distinguishing tactical from non-tactical fouls.

NCAA used to have enforcements (before there even were separate NFL & Fed codes) that differed a lot from what the football codes have now, partly on the above basis. It used to be that for USC and UR fouls, the line to gain was moved along with the spot, because it was recognized that the foul didn't actually help or hinder a team in advancing the ball. In other words, the down and distance to gain remained the same, and only the field position changed. I think the reason they did away with that type of enforcement was for ease of administration.
Reply With Quote