Re: Preventive Officiating?
 

I also disagree with Jaysef because the 12th player is in the formation not entering the field makes it an IP. Consider, the kicker looks over the defensive formation and can't seem to find a weakness because with 12 men there is none. The receivers have already gained an advantage.

The Officials' Manual does give some latitude since officials should always be counting and flag the 12th man as an IS; however, if unable to complete your count you flag it as an IP.

In this situation I would rule PSK based upon 2004 Interpretations, Situation 9 and it is a live-ball foul.

I think you should not have let the play get off. Team R members would have to become set for at least one sec before the snap that should give you plenty of time to count. You should have at least 2 people counting Team R. 12 people on the field is illegal subtitution before the snap.

I agree with Cowboyfan1. This is not a PSK situation because the foul occurred at the LOS when the ball was snapped and the basic spot is the previous spot.
Dale Smith

My Mind is Changing
 

I'm starting to lean back the other way against this being PSK. Primarily for two reasons...

- 2-16-2 differentiates between PSK fouls and fouls that occur simultaneously with the snap. Additionally, the first play situation in 10-6 states "*BETWEEN* the time of the snap and the time the kick ends". This last part may be reading a lot into this but it does help support the case.

- I've been kind of skimming past this in my other interpretations but I agree that it's hard to argue that the foul occurs beyond the expanded neutral zone (10-4-3c) since you really have a foul on the entire team, not something that occurs at a particular spot. Unless, I suppose, the entire team was set up away from the line. :-P

-SW---

That would have been true last season but in 2004 PSK begins with the snap. I had been trying to figure why that change was made and this play makes sense. If you brought the ball back to the previous spot Team A gets an extra down or possibly a whole new series. That is exactly why the PSK exception was enacted.

[Edited by Ed Hickland on Aug 24th, 2004 at 12:55 PM]

Re: At the risk of looking stupid...
 

REPLY: If you have twelve on the field at the snap and (the important thing) <u>none</u> of them were attempting to leave the field, who exactly is the twelfth??? It's IP precisely for that reason, deemed to have occurred simultaneous with the snap. You can't tell who was supposed to be participating. And since all 12 were lined up in a defensive formation, they have all participated in that each of them had an opportunity to affect A's check calls at the LOS and possibly blocking assignments. It is <b>not</b> a PSK foul. Like GPC2 said, it should be penalized as a 5-yd. dead ball IS foul. But often when teams are scrambling with substitutions, it's difficult to count and equally hard to determine whether a replaced player is attempting to leave the field which would make the foul a live ball IS foul (still not PSK).

Althought the situation in this thread shows a possible flaw in the rule you still have to look at the elements of the foul.

1) Is the foul by R beyond the expanded neutral zone? Yes, we have 12 R team members on the field during the play. The way the play is described leads me to believe that all 12 participated so we have an IP foul.

2) Did the foul take place during the interval between the snap and the end of the scrimmage kick that crosses the expanded neutral zone? Yes, IP occurs when you have more than 11 players on a team participating during a live ball.

3) Did the ball belong to R at the end of the play, i.e., did R possess the ball when the ball became dead? Yes, the play indicates that R possessed the ball at the end of the play.

If all three of these elements are answered yes we have a foul that is enforced under PSK enforcement rules. The foul is enforced from the basic spot. If basic spot is behind where the ball becomes dead in R's possession then it is a 15-yd penalty from the basic spot; however, if the ball becomes dead in R's possession behind the basic spot then the penalty is enforced from the succeeding spot.

See how simple that is!!!!!! (read sarcastic tongue in cheek)

I agree, but from the question it seemed as if the BJ realized the twelve players at the snap.

No, the foul is <B>not</b> beyond the expanded neutral zone... There are players all over the field, some within the ENZ, and some not... There is no single spot of the foul for this call...

If you disagree, then tell me where the spot of the foul is...

Fouls at snap are previous spot fouls.
 

Illegal participation fouls occur at the snap and by rule should be enforced from the previous spot.

This should be one of the exceptions to the PSK rules.

Not PSK.
 

I do not think this is PSK and should not be ruled as such. The foul did not talk place neccarily beyond the ENZ. This cannot be PSK from basic definitions. At the very least that is my take. I do not think this was one of the rules that was intended for PSK. I might be completely wrong but at very glance I would not call PSK here.

OK, we have some of R's players attempted to get on their side of the neutral zone when the foul occurs. That makes the first element of PSK enforcement false. Therefore, there would be no PSK enforcement, you would still have an IP foul that would be enforced from the previous spot.

Remember, that all three elements of the PSK must be true for you to have a PSK enforcement. It's really rather simple when you break down the rule to its basic elements.

I apologize for pulling out the IRAC (issue, rule, analysis, conclusion) breakdown that I was taught in law school, but it really does help to understand a situation.

A friend gave me this rules reference which I believe applies.

10-4-2a

The basic spot is the previous spot for fouls that occur simultanelusly with the snap. Wouldn't this rule apply here?

This needs an interpretation from NFHS.

While the book does not state in the rule in the Rule Book under "2004 Football Rules Changes" 2-16-2g "Clarification has been made that a post-scrimmage kick situation begins with the snap..."

The spirit and intent of the rule was exactly to change the situation where A has exhausted its downs and intends to kick the ball to B. However, a foul by B during the scrimmage kick down allows A to retain possession at the previous spot and could result in a new series for A.

PSK was meant to override the inequity in 10-4-2a on scrimmage kick downs.

That's really not the purpose of the querstion but I'll address it so we can get it out of the way.


Yes, it's preferred but it wasn't appropriate. R was confused as to who was supposed to be on the field. They were running off and on at such a rapid rate that it honestly wasn't possible to determine how many were out there and they stopped. By that time, the ball was snapped.

We've all been there. You're trying to count players, not sure if you counted correctly, and you start again. Boom, the ball is snapped.

The key here is how is it handled once it happens. opinions seem to be split down the middle so far.

And yes, all 12 players did participate. 12 on the field at the snap, 12 on the field at the end of the down.