Safety or Not?

[HLin NC]

Was ruled a safety last Friday night? Long discussion from the crew of what to do on the play?

I provided you the applicable rules. Do with it what you will.

[sorrydog]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

I provided you the applicable rules. Do with it what you will.

Not sure what the jest is in your "Do with it what you will" comment? I simply asked a question from watching a football game Friday night. Not a expert on rules since I'm not an official.

[Texas Aggie]

This is why there's no need to bag a fumble behind the line of scrimmage. Ever.

I don't know about Fed but in NCAA there are several reasons why you want to bag a fumble behind the line. 1) 4th down fumble rule application; 2) forward fumble out of bounds; 3) to determine, in certain situations, if the ball was fumbled in the end zone or field of play for batting purposes (no forward batting in FOP; no batting of any kind in EZ) -- this will help the other officials and finally 4) if for no other reason it tells everyone you have a fumble.

As to the play in question, under NCAA rules the play would result in a safety as the ball is brought back to the spot of the fumble. (7-2-4-b-2). This is behind Team A's goal line and thus a safety. (8-5-1-a). Or, they could accept the penalty enforcement and have Team A repeat the down from half the distance back. Under a weird set of circumstances (e.g. bad punter and or weak punt coverage/protection; or maybe its like 3rd down and 40) they may choose to do that.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

I don't know about Fed but in NCAA there are several reasons why you want to bag a fumble behind the line. 1) 4th down fumble rule application; 2) forward fumble out of bounds; 3) to determine, in certain situations, if the ball was fumbled in the end zone or field of play for batting purposes (no forward batting in FOP; no batting of any kind in EZ) -- this will help the other officials and finally 4) if for no other reason it tells everyone you have a fumble.



As to the play in question, under NCAA rules the play would result in a safety as the ball is brought back to the spot of the fumble. (7-2-4-b-2). This is behind Team A's goal line and thus a safety. (8-5-1-a). Or, they could accept the penalty enforcement and have Team A repeat the down from half the distance back. Under a weird set of circumstances (e.g. bad punter and or weak punt coverage/protection; or maybe its like 3rd down and 40) they may choose to do that.

49 states play NFHS rules, so I'm always defaulting there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[ilyazhito]

Texas plays NCAA rules for high school, so that's why TexasAggie made his post about NCAA rules.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Texas plays NCAA rules for high school, so that's why TexasAggie made his post about NCAA rules.

I said 49 so it stands to reason I know that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

I don't know about Fed but in NCAA there are several reasons why you want to bag a fumble behind the line. 1) 4th down fumble rule application; 2) forward fumble out of bounds; 3) to determine, in certain situations, if the ball was fumbled in the end zone or field of play for batting purposes (no forward batting in FOP; no batting of any kind in EZ) -- this will help the other officials and finally 4) if for no other reason it tells everyone you have a fumble.

As to the play in question, under NCAA rules the play would result in a safety as the ball is brought back to the spot of the fumble. (7-2-4-b-2). This is behind Team A's goal line and thus a safety. (8-5-1-a). Or, they could accept the penalty enforcement and have Team A repeat the down from half the distance back. Under a weird set of circumstances (e.g. bad punter and or weak punt coverage/protection; or maybe its like 3rd down and 40) they may choose to do that.

Weird set of circumstances and stupid captain on either or both teams. If it was to B's advantage not to score a safety, but team A repeats the down, why wouldn't team A concede a safety when they repeat the down?

[Texas Aggie]

Like I said, if the hold occurred on 3rd and, say, 35 (and I've had a few of those this year) and Team A's punter was REALLY bad, and the place kicker was really good, and perhaps it was late in the game and 2 points didn't mean much, you MIGHT go ahead and wipe out the safety. Again, really weird set of circumstances and the coach risks karma coming back and Team A getting a first down (or, even worse, Team B committing a foul on the next play that results in a first down -- something I've also seen several times this year). After a safety, a free kick from the 20 from a good kicker might put the team back at their own 20 whereas a bad punt on 4th down might put them at the other team's 40 or better. If I KNEW I was going to get that, down 7, last 2 minutes or so in the game, I'd decline the penalty. 2 points means nothing in that situation.

This would be pretty limited (say, once in 5 years), but I think the important thing in any penalty enforcement (and I think Fed is the same) is to remember that any penalty may be declined and to go through and think what happens in any case if the penalty is declined. The first question I ask as an R is "what happened on the play" if I don't know.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Like I said, if the hold occurred on 3rd and, say, 35 (and I've had a few of those this year) and Team A's punter was REALLY bad, and the place kicker was really good, and perhaps it was late in the game and 2 points didn't mean much, you MIGHT go ahead and wipe out the safety.

Why wipe out anything that the other team can restore at will?