![]() |
|
|||
You'll love this one...coach was in a hurry up and instructed his QB to spike the ball after a long sack...problem was, he did it from the shotgun. When I flagged him he went berserk. Question for you all...would you have started the clock with the ready or the snap? I won't tip you to what we did.
|
|
|||
Team A may leaglly stop the clock by spiking the ball after a hand-to-hand snap. Anywhere else on the field is an illegal foward pass - 5yds from the spot of the pass, LOD, clock on the snap.
__________________
Dave |
|
|||
I agree that starting on the ready would be the right call, but for the life of me I cant find this in the "Book" . I first looked at NF 7-5-2d
An illegal forward pass is a foul. The illegal forward passes are: d: A pass intentionally thrown incomplete to save loss of yardage or to conserve time. This seems to fit as far as the pass goes. Then I went to NF 3-4-3f The clock shall start with the snap or when any free kick is touched, other than first touching by K, if the clock was stopped because:. e: A legal or illegal forward pass is incomplete. All this seems to indicate starting on the snap. Help me out here guys. What am I missing? |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Bob M. |
|
|||
We had this happen in a game this year. We missed one thing. If the penalty is accepted, the team would get an untimed down if time runs out before the next play.
Our main question as to when to start the clock wsa whether this was an illeagal attempt to conserve time or an attempt to conserve time legally done incorrectly. No matter what, A gets some advantage because you take time to administer the penalty accepted or not.
__________________
Steve |
|
|||
It would depend on how you explained the situation to the defense. Accepting or declining the penalty will not affect the Referee decision to invoke 3.6.3. The clock should still be started on the ready.
Like you said, acceptance of the penalty would not be a good choice for the defense. It was not a legal way to stop the clock, so there should not have been any question as what to do. Whoever suggested it might be a legal way done incorrectly must be a lawyer or something. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|