[mikesears]

Originally posted by Bob M.
OK you guys, the season's getting closer. While the discussion about Maori football, British colonialism, American democracy, sports as a mirror on society, and the relative military and athletic prowess of Americans, British, and the Maori is very interesting, it’s a diversion and is doing little to get us all ready. So…I’m doing my part to try and get us back to discussion about American football. Here’s the multiple part question:

What are your pet peeves with the current Federation code, i.e. what are the most misleading, confusing, or poorly constructed rules. And you get the chance to be a Federation Rules Editor: In your answer, cite the rule (Rule-Section-Article) and what you would do to fix the situation. I’ll be the first contributor…

Current
Rule 5-1-2a: A new series of downs is awarded:
a. After a first, second or third down, a new series of downs shall be awarded only after considering the effect of any act during the down and any dead ball foul.

I don’t believe this says what’s really intended. It should be reworded to say:

Proposed
Rule 5-1-2a: A new series of downs is awarded:
a. After a first, second or third down, a new series of downs shall be awarded only after considering the effect of any act during the down other than a nonplayer or unsportsmanlike foul by A and any dead ball foul by B.

Rewording it this way would make it clear that if Team A gained a first down by virtue of their run or pass, but committed an unsportsmanlike or nonplayer foul during the down, or committed a dead ball foul after the down, they would still be awarded a first down with the penalty enforced from the succeeding spot.

My thanks to Steve Hall (New Hampshire Football Officials Association) for offering this new wording.

If I were an octopus with hands, I'd say eight thumbs up. The current NFHS rule doesn't seem to take into account a foul by the offense after a 1st down. I will post my pet-peave when I've had a chance to consider how to rewrite the rule.