Enforcement spot

[yankeesfan]

A's ball at 50 yard line. QB goes back to pass and has his face mask pulled and turned at the 35. He breaks away and then throws the ball from his 45. Where is the 15 yards penalized from?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[whitehat]

Because the foul occurred during the loose ball portion of the play "the run which precedes a legal forward pass" (10.3.1.note) this would be enforced from the previous spot. A may decline the FM penalty and take the results of the play.

The "tack on" enforcement does not come into play in this case. The exception only applies to a passer who has been roughed and the pass is completed beyond the LOS.

In the OP situation the QB does not become a passer until he passes the ball and therefore does not qualify for being "roughed" while he is scrambling around. Had the QB been roughed, then the penalty can be added to the end of the run on a completed pass beyond the LOS (10.5.5), Otherwise is it simply a loose ball/previous spot basic spot.

The other caveat to this is any PF acts against the passer (which would include a FM, etc) even if they are not late put committed in the act of passing can qualify for roughing if it is against the passer. Yet, these PF do not qualify as roughing and therefore are not "tacked on" unless and until they are committed against a passer.

[jblowery]

Correct. I was confused with roughing the passer. This is similar to defensive pass interference or defensive holding before the pass.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by whitehat

In the OP situation the QB does not become a passer until he passes the ball and therefore does not qualify for being "roughed" while he is scrambling around. Had the QB been roughed, then the penalty can be added to the end of the run on a completed pass beyond the LOS (10.5.5), Otherwise is it simply a loose ball/previous spot basic spot.

The other caveat to this is any PF acts against the passer (which would include a FM, etc) even if they are not late put committed in the act of passing can qualify for roughing if it is against the passer.

Please explain what you mean by "even if they are not late but committed in the act of passing".

[whitehat]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Please explain what you mean by "even if they are not late but committed in the act of passing".

According to 9.4.4 last sentence on Roughing the passer "No defensive player shall commit any illegal personal contact foul listed in 9.4.3 against the passer."

In other words, roughing has always been simply charging late into the passer with an otherwise legal or illegal hit (after he has thrown it) when the contact could have been avoided. That's a paraphrase of 9.4.4.

Let's say B55 initiates illegal helmet contact on the passer just as he throws it. The hit is not late but is still one of those PF listed in 9.4.3. So, we now call that "roughing" even though it was not late. Previously we would have simply flagged it as a PF/illegal helmet contact and step off 15 yards. But now we enforce it as a roughing penalty with an auto first down. If pass is completed beyond the LOS the Roughing is tacked on/enforced from the end of the run. If pass incomplete it is enforced from Previous spot and in both cases an auto first down.

Redding Study guide 2015 page 46 "Illegal personal contact fouls against the passer (helmet contact, pulling the face mask, etc) committed before it is clear that the ball has been thrown, are roughing fouls."

RSG example 5-29 "As A12 releases a forward pass he is struck in the chest by B52 who had lowered his head and led with his helmet. RULING: Although the contact was before it was clear that the ball had been thrown, the foul is for roughing the passer."

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by whitehat

According to 9.4.4 last sentence on Roughing the passer "No defensive player shall commit any illegal personal contact foul listed in 9.4.3 against the passer."

In other words, roughing has always been simply charging late into the passer with an otherwise legal or illegal hit (after he has thrown it) when the contact could have been avoided. That's a paraphrase of 9.4.4.

Let's say B55 initiates illegal helmet contact on the passer just as he throws it. The hit is not late but is still one of those PF listed in 9.4.3. So, we now call that "roughing" even though it was not late. Previously we would have simply flagged it as a PF/illegal helmet contact and step off 15 yards. But now we enforce it as a roughing penalty with an auto first down. If pass is completed beyond the LOS the Roughing is tacked on/enforced from the end of the run. If pass incomplete it is enforced from Previous spot and in both cases an auto first down.

Redding Study guide 2015 page 46 "Illegal personal contact fouls against the passer (helmet contact, pulling the face mask, etc) committed before it is clear that the ball has been thrown, are roughing fouls."

RSG example 5-29 "As A12 releases a forward pass he is struck in the chest by B52 who had lowered his head and led with his helmet. RULING: Although the contact was before it was clear that the ball had been thrown, the foul is for roughing the passer."

What I'm having a problem with is your use of the word "late". To be any sort of contact against the passer, it has to be initiated while he doesn't have possession of the ball, or he wasn't a passer & hence couldn't've been roughed as a passer.

Is all you're saying that which type of foul & enforcement is deemed to have occurred depends on whether the personal foul was before or after he let go of the ball? Seems the simplest way to put it. Then it seems all Redding's saying is that if there's any doubt as to when the ball was released, rule that it was released before the foul.

[whitehat]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

What I'm having a problem with is your use of the word "late". To be any sort of contact against the passer, it has to be initiated while he doesn't have possession of the ball, or he wasn't a passer & hence couldn't've been roughed as a passer.

Is all you're saying that which type of foul & enforcement is deemed to have occurred depends on whether the personal foul was before or after he let go of the ball? Seems the simplest way to put it. Then it seems all Redding's saying is that if there's any doubt as to when the ball was released, rule that it was released before the foul.

Robert, sorry for the confusion. "Late" may be misleading as I used it. The rule book verbage to describe "roughing" type contact on a passer is "avoidable" contact. Contact can be made after the ball is released that is still "legal." This happens all the time when we don't call "roughing" because the contact was not "late," it was not avoidable.

Example: If Passer A12 releases the ball in a legal forward pass and B55 contacts him let's say within a half step after the passer releases the ball and we would not have flagged it for "roughing" we now can flag it for roughing if the contact was of the PF type (as listed in 9,4,3) even though the contact was "unavoidable."

Here is a real life example that happened earlier this season.

A12 releases the ball and B99, a split second later, makes helmet to helmet contact with the passer. I correctly flagged this as "roughing." Prior to 2014 this would simply have been a PF for illegal helmet contact, not "roughing," because the contact was bang/bang, "unavoidable" (that is, ball released, contact made.) This "technical" distinction makes a difference in the enforcement: Roughing is auto first down and PF is not.

In a nutshell summary: Any contact on the passer that we judge to be a PF type contact (whether avoidable or not) we call "roughing."

Any clearer or more confusing?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by whitehat

In a nutshell summary: Any contact on the passer that we judge to be a PF type contact (whether avoidable or not) we call "roughing."

Any clearer or more confusing?

That way of describing it is crystal clear.