The Official Forum - Uncle Ernie's April Quiz

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Football (https://forum.officiating.com/football/)

- - Uncle Ernie's April Quiz (https://forum.officiating.com/football/13072-uncle-ernies-april-quiz.html)

As Bob said Uncle. A cannot decline B's foul. You do not even go to them. Just enforce the penalty.

Quote:

The answer is no, thay may not decline B's foul. In fact, when B declines A's foul there are no more options. The penalty for B's foul must be enforced because both cannot be declined. After enforcement for B's foul, it is B's ball at A's 38 yard line for an untimed down.

So, this is different in High School than in NCAA?

Thanks for the clarification.

UE

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Uncle Ernie
[B]

Quote:

So, this is different in High School than in NCAA?

Thats right Uncy-poo, In NF rules we don't even ask A .
NF 10-2-2 says ". . . If each team fouls during a down in which there is a change of team possession, the team last gaining possession may retain the ball, provided its foul is not prior to the final change of possession and it declined the penalty for its opponent s foul, other than unsportsmanlike. In this case, the team not last in possession has no penalty options.

(the Underline and Italics are mine)

BTW,,,are we working togeather this Sat ? Dick is picking me up in GP. I need you around to keep the guys from picking on me to much :p

Quote:

Originally posted by Bob Mc

Quote:

We hope to have the Oregon rule posted on one of our websites soon.

KWH when you get the wordsmithing done email to me if you please so's us in the Mid-Columbia can play from the same book as you in Portland. Thanks

Bob-
When finalized,
It will be available on the OSAA website: http://www.osaa.org
along with the OAOA website: http://www.oreofficials.org
and it will be on the PFOA website: http://www.pfoa.us
I am currently finishing up DRAFT 10, when I finish I will e-mail you an advance copy. Please remember it is still a "DRAFT", we would prefer it not be published to the world just yet. (Uncle Ernie and James Neil I will also advance you copies of draft 10.) It is mainly formatting changes, (We are shortening it!) and making it more user friendly (i.e. less reading). I did correct some rules numbers that I had fat finger typo's on.
When we get it finalized, it is my intention to postting it on this website (or maybe better just posting a link) and everybody can ask questions, (or throw darts), and just creat some general good (creative?) conversation (and water-bucket plays). It is coming soon...

Can someone explain #5? I had the same ruling, but when I read the answer (which agrees with me) I'm now changing my answer based on the assumption you make in the answer.

I pasted the question and answer between the ***** for convenience...

**********************************************

5. A 2/4 B8. QB A18 hands off to A44 on B's 13. A44 runs to B's 6 near the sideline where B55 hits him causing the ball to come loose. B38 then deflects the bouncing ball and B12 controls the ball while touching the end line.

Assuming the deflection was a legal muff, TB B 1/10 @ B-20 clock on snap

*********************************************

I had touchback because I was assuming it deflected of B38's uniform or something. But you assume it was a MUFF (an unsuccessful attempt to secure posession) which by rule constitutes a new force which makes me change my ruling to SAFETY. A new force can result from a muff of a grounded loose ball which is what happened. Am I all wet here???

OK. A muff MAY result in a new force, but it normally will not. When a ball is still moving you will seldom have a new force.Especially be careful around the goalline.
Normally to have a new force added the ball must be, or almost be, at rest. If there is any doubt that the ball may have bounced into the EZ you rule on the side of the original force.
It is definately a judgement thing to add a new force. And that judgement must be of no doubt.

Quote:

Originally posted by ljudge
Can someone explain #5? I had the same ruling, but when I read the answer (which agrees with me) I'm now changing my answer based on the assumption you make in the answer.

I pasted the question and answer between the ***** for convenience...

**********************************************

5. A 2/4 B8. QB A18 hands off to A44 on B's 13. A44 runs to B's 6 near the sideline where B55 hits him causing the ball to come loose. B38 then deflects the bouncing ball and B12 controls the ball while touching the end line.

Assuming the deflection was a legal muff, TB B 1/10 @ B-20 clock on snap

*********************************************

I had touchback because I was assuming it deflected of B38's uniform or something. But you assume it was a MUFF (an unsuccessful attempt to secure posession) which by rule constitutes a new force which makes me change my ruling to SAFETY. A new force can result from a muff of a grounded loose ball which is what happened. Am I all wet here???

A muff, by rule, is the touching or accidently kicking of a loose ball by a player in an unsuccessful attempt to secure possession. A muff, by rule, does not automatically constitute a new force. The rule defining force states after a fumble has been grounded, a new force "may" result from a muff. To have a new force in this case you would probably have to have a ball at rest or nearly at rest to have a new force. In question #5 it was stated that B38 deflected a bouncing ball. The original force,fumble,had not been spent. The ball was declared dead in B's end zone. Touchback is the correct ruling.

Excellent clarity by both of you. Bob M pointed that out in an e-mail too. "May" is a very powerful word. I agree with what you guys are saying and it makes more sense now that I think a little more about it. That's what I like about these forums.

We help each other get it right and this is what these forums are supposed to be about....so thanks!!!