Is this a PSK foul?

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by goldcoastump
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.

Don't know what game you're officiating but there's no requirement that team R players have to become set for one second.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Bob M.
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).

Exactly. Thank you, Bob.

We all agree that you should kill the play if possible. But it isn't ALWAYS possible. Forget what should have happened. It didn't. The play happened, how do we penalize it?

[cowbyfan1]

Originally posted by SoGARef

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.

The point of this there are 12 on the field at the snap and thus an IP. With the way teams GENERALLY line up you have 1 deep returner and then the rest on the line at the snap. There may be 1 other a little bit off the line but most teams have 10 on the line (or 11 in this case).
As stated before, you do not have a spot on this type of foul. The rule book also clearly states this is a previous spot foul and with that, there is no exception to PSK for this foul. While I agree that the changes the fed made this year to PSK, it could be looked at as PSK. However they have not released anything written on this saying it is PSK thus I will stick to enforcing per the current written IP rule.

[Dale Smith]

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] [/B][/QUOTE]

Sorry Ed I have to disagree with you. This years and last years interpretation does not come in to play in this case. What does come in to question is exactly where is the spot of the foul? You have 12 men all over the field. Is the 12th man on the line? Is he a deep receiver? We do not know and never will know in this situation. Granted the play should have been shut down prior to the snap but sometimes that just does not happen. In this case the foul happened when the ball was snapped. Since we do not know which player is not supposed to be on the field, common sense also says that the spot of the foul is the line of scrimmage. Not beyond the expanded neutral zone. Therefore on this play PSK does not apply.
Dale Smith

[jack015]

Put me down on the side that believes this is NOT a PSK foul.

If you look in the Case Book under the IP section in rule 10, one of the comments states, and I am paraphrasing, if either team has more than 11 players on the field who are participating (the 12th is not attempting to leave the field), it is a foul for IP, and is a 15 yard penalty enforced from the previous spot (NO EXCEPTIONS).

Also, if K has 4th dowm and less than 5 yards to go, and this is flagged prior to the snap, they will still get their 1st down, just as they most likely will if it is flagged simultaneuos with the snap and is a 15 yard penalty. This is no great revalation on my part. I just do not recall that point being brought up in the previous posts on this topic.

[jransom]

Originally posted by Dale Smith


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]

Sorry Ed I have to disagree with you. This years and last years interpretation does not come in to play in this case. What does come in to question is exactly where is the spot of the foul? You have 12 men all over the field. Is the 12th man on the line? Is he a deep receiver? We do not know and never will know in this situation. Granted the play should have been shut down prior to the snap but sometimes that just does not happen. In this case the foul happened when the ball was snapped. Since we do not know which player is not supposed to be on the field, common sense also says that the spot of the foul is the line of scrimmage. Not beyond the expanded neutral zone. Therefore on this play PSK does not apply.
Dale Smith [/QUOTE]

The reason that the change was made is because that is the way it was intended to be in the first place: Simpler and more sensible.
Our local association (which I didn't belong to at the time) was instrumental in orchestrating the initial PSK rule experiment and eventual rule change. Not that they were pioneers or anything (NFL and NCAA? already had it), but in the 1st year of PSK as a NFHS rule, Columbus told us to enforce PSK starting with the snap becuase that is the way "we" (OH) wrote it to begin with but the Fed. comittee changed it. You all know that it is nearly impossible for an official calling a potential PSK foul to know whether or not the ball had crossed the NZ when the foul occurred--or for the HL (watching whether or not the ball crosses the NZ) to know when that flag was thrown. The spritit of the rule, in my paraphrase, says that a foul on R's side of the ENZ on a punt is relative to R's return of the kick (field position) whether or not the kick has yet to have been made; if a foul by R occurs in the ENZ or on K's side, it is reletive to R's pursuit of the kicker, and if an R foul occurs before the snap (or simultaneous with it), it also falls into the category of gaining an advantage for line play, etc. Think about it this way: in general, is the foul one you would normally see after a change of possession?

Hope that helps

Jonathan

[cmathews]

Ok BBR the thread is 3 pages now..and very good discussion, and as you mentioned it appears to be split down the middle...there can be a case made either way...so tell us how did you guys handle it??

[Theisey]

I'll break the split and cast a vote for not a PSK foul.

[Simbio]

I'll tilt the scale and say that it is not a PSK foul.....after reading everyone's comments on this, it just makes more sense to me.....I emailed five of my friends that are officials with the same question and they all agreed it was not PSK.....

Its not a spot foul, and its a foul at the snap....I say its not PSK....

This has been a good thread, good discussion on it....

[Edited by Simbio on Aug 25th, 2004 at 12:31 PM]

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by cmathews
Ok BBR the thread is 3 pages now..and very good discussion, and as you mentioned it appears to be split down the middle...there can be a case made either way...so tell us how did you guys handle it??

We penalized it with previous spot administration. As the U, my argument was that the foul occurred simultaneous with the snap. Had it been IS instead of IP, I felt that we still would have foul at the snap - previous spot enforcement. But, does the foul occuring at the snap matter?

I have no idea if we were right or not.

Evidently, no one else does either.

That's why I brought it up, because I don't know. Think I'll post it on McGriff to get some other comments.

[cmathews]

Oh, sure ask for our help and then take it somewhere else to "get more opinions" LOL...for pete's sake the majority supported your decision too LOL.....so how did everyone take it any squalling from the affected howler monkey???

[PS2Man]

BK

I think you handled it properly. I think that is the most common sense way to handle it. I have to admit that I am not sure myself.

[cmathews]

I think they handled it correctly also...I am with everyone else in the not exactly sure, but I think they did the right thing...

[Smiley]

I think BBR handled it correctly, also. All fouls simultaneious with the snap are previous spot enforcement. PSK does not apply because there is no location for this foul.

[cowbyfan1]

Sent an email and I got a reply back..

R did not commit a PSK foul.



By rule (10-4-1a) the spot of the foul will be the previous spot. I would also reference you to Rule 2-16-2g.



If the penalty is accepted it would be first and ten for K at R’s 40-yard line.



Hope that helps.





Jerry L. Diehl

Assistant Director

National Federation of State High School Assn. (NFHS)

P.O. Box 690

Indianapolis, IN 46206

(O) 317-972-6900

(F) 317-822-5700

http://www.nfhs.org


So there it is folks.. Per the Fed it is not PSK thus administered from the previous spot.