Need Case Book Reference

[ljudge]

Gentlemen: I don't have my case book with me today and need a reference to something. I would like to know if anyone happens to have his book available if you could please tell me where this is located...

It's either under rule 5.1 or whereever "non-player" foul cases are located.

My rules interpreter asked me where I saw the following in the case book....

Something like this. It's A's ball 4th and 10. Team A runs for 6 yards and is short of the LTG by 4 full yards. During the down a B team sub enters the game but does not participate. So it's a live-ball non-player foul (see 3.7.1). Since's the down is 4th (see 5.1.2b) it's a 5-yard succeeding spot enforcement (succeeding spot b/c it's nonplayer - just like unsportsmanlike).

My ruling is 5 yards against team B and B STILL GETS THE BALL. I say that because A did not get to the LTG by live-ball action during the down (other than nonplayer or unsportsmanlike).

The disagreement we were having is since it was a live-ball foul then A gets the ball because after enforcement the ball is beyond the LTG. I don't agree that A keeps the ball. There's definitely a case in the book along with a comment that starts with "On 4th down plays...."

Anyone know of the case / situation number and what page its on?

My real question comes if that nonplayer eventually participates. I'm confident of the IS ruling but what about IP? Is that treated the same? Non-player from succeeding spot and still giving B the ball? But first things first, I need to have common ground on the IS enforcement.

Thanks in advance,
Ljudge

[Bob Mc]

Case book 5.1.2 B and 5.1.2 D should answer your question

[nvfoa15]

I agree with the IS administration.

With regard to the IP: Case book page 73 Comment 8:

"If a substitute enter the field during a down and hinders an opponent, influences the play or touches the ball, it is illegal participation. The spot of the foul is where the illegal participation took place. The 15-yard penalty is enforced under the all-but-one principle (9-6-3)."

Thus it would appear that the IP is treated different than the IS penalty. Therefore, in your situation, it would remain A's ball after enforcement. (Enforce from the end of A's run.) There is no case book play in the 2004 edition that decsribes your proposed situation.

[ljudge]

Makes 100% sense. My rules interpreter got back to me today and helped me understand a non-player IP this way. He said if a team B player came out of the box and made the tackle short of the LTG, imagine what the coach of A would do if I gave the ball over to B. After I read his response I couldn't believe I asked such a stupid, stupid question.

Thanks for getting back to me, as always!

[chiefgil]

There are no stupid questions. If this board has helped clear up a hitch in your thought process, then the question was a good one.