Is this a PSK foul?

[BktBallRef]

4th down, R is strugging to get the proper number of players on the field.

With players still running on and off the fied, the ball is snapped.

BJ determines there are 12 receivers in on the play, illegal participation.

Is this PSK or not?

I haven't looked it up yet, so I thought I'd ask before I did. I'll tell you what we did after a few replies.

[SeanWest]

I'm new at this but I'd say you do have PSK based on the change to the rule this year that the PSK "window" starts at the snap. I would think the enforcement would be 15 yds. from the end of the kick, R's ball.

Am I close?

-SW---

[PiggSkin]

Everything in my gut tells me that this is not a PSK foul... However, there's not much in the rulebook that I see that supports me... Here's the only thing I can find:

The foul must occur beyond the expanded neutral zone... If R lines up with 12 players, where is the spot of the foul..? Wherever the 12 player is..? Which one is the 12th..? Is it the return man..? (Who is clearly beyond the ENZ...) Or is it the Nose Guard..? (Who is not beyond the ENZ...)

I rule no PSK... I wish I had clearer justification, though...

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
4th down, R is strugging to get the proper number of players on the field.

With players still running on and off the fied, the ball is snapped.

BJ determines there are 12 receivers in on the play, illegal participation.

Is this PSK or not?

I haven't looked it up yet, so I thought I'd ask before I did. I'll tell you what we did after a few replies.

Perfectly legal.

HAHAHAHAHA

[schmitty1973]

I would think the only time it would be a PSK foul is if the 12th man ran onto the field while the kick was in the air beyond the neutral zone. Otherwise, enforcement should be from previous spot.

[SoGARef]

The interval in which PSK fouls can occur is now when the ball is snapped instead of when the ball crosses the expanded neutral zone. Additionally, the stipulation that the kick must end beyond the neutral zone has been removed. For PSK enforcement to apply all of the following conditions must be met:

The foul is by Team R beyond the expanded neutral zone.

The foul takes place during the interval between the snap and the end of the scrimmage kick (not a try) that crosses the expanded neutral zone.

The ball belongs to Team R when the down ends.

In your example you said you had IP a foul which occurs after the snap. So if you had an IP foul on Team R and the ball was possessed by R at the end of the down and the ball crossed the expanded neutral zone then by rule the foul would be administered from the PSK spot. Doesn't seem fair but that is the way the rule is currently written.

[PiggSkin]

Originally posted by SoGARef
...
For PSK enforcement to apply all of the following conditions must be met:

The foul is by Team R beyond the expanded neutral zone.
...

So where is the spot of the foul..?

FWIW: I think the intent of the rule is to not include fouls that are simultaneous with the snap... I think this is a hole in the new rule that hasn't been discovered yet... That being said, that's only my interpretation, which means jack squat...

[SeanWest]

I can see PiggSkin's point and that's where I was leaning before I started reviewing the rule books and the more I think about it, the more I think that enforcing this as PSK is within the spirit of the PSK rule...

- the kicking team is giving up possession of the ball regardless of what the confused R players are doing;

- R won't get the benefit of any extra run back the 12th man may have given them because the foul will be enforced from the end of the kick;

- it seems like a tripple whammy on R if you give the ball back to K after they kicked it away, give them an extra 15 yards, and that, most likely will give K a first down.

I still vote PSK.

-SW---

[schmitty1973]

I know I have the whole PSK thing confused, but I don't see how R can keep the ball. If it was an INT instead of a punt, would B still get to keep the ball? I don't think so.
(I know INT's are different from punts ... I just don't get it I guess)

[cmathews]

BBR, Good question....I guess I am leaning towards no PSK, the only reason I can use to support it is the spot of the foul, and whether it is beyond the neutral zone or not.. I say IP 15 from the previous spot and go on....it doesn't feel right though..

[cowbyfan1]

I would have to say not PSK as per the case book on page 73.
1. If there are more than 11 players in the formation at the snap, either offensively or defensively, the foul is considered to have occured at the snap and is IP. The 15 yard penalty is administered from the previous spot.

Until we get something differnt from the Fed I would have to say to go this way.

I also see where others are coming from with the thought to PSK but I fell the need to lean this way.

[Jaysef]

Wouldn't the infraction be IS, instead of IP in this case? I don't have my rule book, but doesn't the 12th man have to contribute to the action on the field for it to be ruled IP? And if so, it would be a 5- yarder enforced from the PSK spot 1 & 10 for R. Help me if I'm way off.

Seef

[Warrenkicker]

Assuming that you had 12 participate so you did have IP I would have to go with it not being a PSK foul. PSK now begins with the snap. You had IS but allowed it to become IP. The foul therefore occured before the snap and thus does not meet the definition of PSK.

Or, since it was a foul at the snap it didn't occur during the play as it was a foul at the snap.

Either way I don't think that this foul meets all of the requirements for PSK and should be a previous spot enforcement.

[GPC2]

I somewhat agree with Jaysef, but I have a different spin on it. How's about killing the play as it starts and call Dead Ball - Illegal Substitution? This would certainly prevent all of the confusion about how to enforce.

Is that acceptable?

[PiggSkin]

Not only is it acceptable, it's preferred... However, it's not always possible to count 12, then verify your count before the snap in time to kill the play...