Extending a period for a foul--NF

[Bill D]

For many years, Rule 3-3-3 (or its predecessor) has stated:

"A period must be extended by an untimed down if during the last timed down, one of the following occurs:
a. There was a foul, other than unsportsmanlike or non player, by either team and the penalty is accepted."

The current version of 3-3-3 has deleted the words "last timed down" and replaced it with "last down of the period".

Is this a change or more sloppy NF editing?

[ABoselli]

I think they changed it so that if that same situation happened again (like the one that made us run an untimed down in the first place - accepted foul ect.), we'd run another untimed down on top of the one we just ran. It's not a 'last timed down' in that case, just a 'last down'.

[Bill D]

Here's the situation.

A scores as time expires for the period. On the successful try, there is OPI. We all know that no points are scored and there is no replay of the try. But the try was the last down of the period. Do we have a kick off? We never would have before.

[BktBallRef]

The change is an editorial change for this year. If you look in the front of your rule book, you'll see that 3-3-3 is listed.

As for your play, if B accepts the penalty, the points are no good, the down is not replayed and the half is over.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Oct 28th, 2003 at 11:55 AM]

[Bill D]

I agree that 3-3-3 as now written is the result of an "editorial change". However, generally editorial changes do not result in changes in game administration.

I agree that under the new "last down" language, we would need an untimed kick off. However, what is your support for enforcing the OPI yardage on the kick off? That would require succeeding spot enforcement.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Bill D
I agree that 3-3-3 as now written is the result of an "editorial change". However, generally editorial changes do not result in changes in game administration.

I agree that under the new "last down" language, we would need an untimed kick off. However, what is your support for enforcing the OPI yardage on the kick off? That would require succeeding spot enforcement.

I'm not sure about that one either. Quite honestly, I'm not sure the rules provide us with an answer to that question.

BTW, that issue would exist even without the untimed down issue. If OPI occurs on a try, we know the down isn't replayed but is the 15 yards assessed or not? I began looking for it earlier today and I find no rule that says it can be marked from the SS.

[Forksref]

BktBallRef is correct. There is no provision for succeeding spot for OPI, only the previous spot. Kickoff at the 40 for one untimed down.

[TNDavid]

With respect to the play situation discussed above, there have been several threads on the McGriff Board with an interpretation, purported to be based on an inquiry to the NFHS, to the effect that, since the reason the period was originally extended was for the try down to be played, the period can only be further extended by a replay of the try. If the foul against A includes the loss of the right to replay the down, then the try is over and the period is ended. You should not extend the period for a kickoff.

[BktBallRef]

I have read the threads that TNDavid cites and there certainly do say that the half is over after the try. While I would certainly follow the interp if the situation arises, the rules, as written, do not support it.