Spike the ball to stop the clock

[BoomerSooner]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I'm not sure I grasp the concept fully. Had it not been for the IW, we don't know how the down might've ended, so we don't know whether the clock would've stopped then or not. The administration of IW of course stops the clock, or a ruling of incomplete forward pass might've be interpreted as having done so. But are you sure it's about whether the clock was stopped then, as opposed to whether it was stopped before the down began which was to be replayed?

I think I get the question you're trying to ask. The scenario I think you are asking about is: Clock is stopped and by rule set to start on the snap. During the down, an IW ends the play and A elects to replay the down. Since the down to be replayed required the clock to be started on the snap, shouldn't that status be maintained?

If that is what you are asking, then the answer is no. Replaying the down for an IW does not amount to a "do over". If it did, the game clock would need to be reset to the time prior to the play with the IW. The way to look at it is that the clock was properly started on the snap. A down was completed, albeit with the ending being an IW. When you rule the play to have ended on an IW, the IW is the reason the clock stopped. The definition of an IW is one that occurs while the ball is live and makes the ball dead prior to any of the "standard" reasons for the ball being dead. If the ball was already dead for any other of the "standard" reasons that would have also stopped the clock, then it there can't be an IW. Remember the fundamental that the "whistle seldom kills the ball". An IW is one of those "seldom" times the whistle kills the ball. By rule, the clock starts on the RFP if it was stopped because of an IW. No exception or clarification is made that alters this regardless of whether the down is replayed or accepted.

In my previous post, I asked if there was any value in discussing whether the clock stopped because of an incomplete pass or because of the IW. In reality it was just a question to stimulate thought and then lead into my follow-up of why I think it isn't wise to change the ruling from incomplete pass to IW. That said, if you do initially rule incomplete pass but then change your ruling to an IW, then you are saying the IW is the reason the play ended and the reason for the clock stopping. The initial ruling of an incomplete pass would not longer have any relevance on the administration of the clock, because you can't have an incomplete pass followed by an IW.