proposed Federation changes

[Zeke5]

Nice post JoeC. I'm curious to see all the responses to
this in the off-season, and I'm sure there are a lot of
other suggestions to come.

I'd have to say that I STRONGLY agree with you on all
of your assertions, but I'd like to play devil's advocate:

#1.) The NFL has a concept of continuing action in which
certain actions (like late hits on the runner) are
are considered fouls of the previous play penalized from
the succeeding spot. The nature of these fouls are always
personal fouls which are all automatic first downs for
A if committed by B (In the NFL). Neat, but it also places
an additional onus on the officials to determine what actions are a continuing action of the play.

Questions:
Can a continuing action foul only be committed by the
defense? What if right after B55 piles on, A10 flattens
B26 30 yards away from the play? Isn't this a continuing
action? Would the penalties offset and possession goes to
B? When and where does an action fail to be designated as
a continuing action? Obviously, a lot of grey areas would
be introduced if the Federation would adopt this change.

How about this philosophy: What part of the action of B55's
late hit prevented A from reaching the line to gain?

#2) This situation suffers from almost the same points
of contention for #1. There would be an added burden
placed on the officials to determine which acts were
associated or near simultaneous.

#3) Why not make all personal fouls on B automatic
first downs for A? It sure would simplify things for us.
I'd like to see the Competition Committee toss this one
around.

As for #1 & #2, I'm sure it is (and has been) in the
interest of the Federation to mitigate (or eliminate) the
amount of subjective interpretation necessary to enforce
penalties. I'd have to admit that Rule 10 is one of the
shortest and most succinct rules in the book with minimal
exceptions (All-but-one, non-player fouls and
unsportsmanlike). Why? Because it serves to produce
uniform, clear cut enforcement of penalties in 50 states
at the ground level of football officiating. This is not to
say that there aren't any officials at our level that are
capable of making these determinations, it's just that
there are enough questions about our interpretations
that caused us to throw a flag, why introduce even more
questions about how we enforced it since that is one
thing we can always back up with the book?

Just my 2 cents ...