Fumble Advanced for a Touchdown

[Cruser]

Originally posted by JAZZMAN
I asked our state clinician about this play. He said that the foul occurred on the first running play and would have to be declined for the touchdown to stand.

Ineresting. Now I've gone back in forth on this situation 3 times regarding enforcing on the try or enforcing at the end of the related run if A were to accept.

Any input from some of the vets around here?

[GeorgiaBlue]

NFHS 10-5-1f

Special enforcement rules - the following fouls have special enforcement provisions and options for the offended team - a foul by the opponents of the scoring team on a touchdown (see 8-2-2).

8-2-2

If during a touchdown, a foul by the opponents of the scoring team occurs, the scoring team may accept the results of the play and have the penalty enforced from the succeeding spot.

It really doesn't get much clearer than this - I see no wiggle room for other interpretation. That's why it is a SPECIAL ENFORCEMENT RULE.

[PSU213]

Originally posted by GeorgiaBlue
NFHS 10-5-1f

Special enforcement rules - the following fouls have special enforcement provisions and options for the offended team - a foul by the opponents of the scoring team on a touchdown (see 8-2-2).

8-2-2

If during a touchdown, a foul by the opponents of the scoring team occurs, the scoring team may accept the results of the play and have the penalty enforced from the succeeding spot.

It really doesn't get much clearer than this - I see no wiggle room for other interpretation. That's why it is a SPECIAL ENFORCEMENT RULE.

First I agree that you can keep the score and have the penalty enforced on the try.

I think the "wiggle room" comes from the word "play," as play is different than down, as per Rule 2-31.

[JAZZMAN]

Our state clinician is on the FEDERATION rules committee and he told me since the first run did not end in the endzone that the penalty would be the end of that run. If the runner had not fumbled, but had HANDED the ball to another teammate and then the touchdown been scored, the endzone would have been the end of the run with enforcement on the try.
I have heard it said that officiating football isn't rocket science, but it isn't basketball either!

[GeorgiaBlue]

Originally posted by JAZZMAN
Our state clinician is on the FEDERATION rules committee and he told me since the first run did not end in the endzone that the penalty would be the end of that run. If the runner had not fumbled, but had HANDED the ball to another teammate and then the touchdown been scored, the endzone would have been the end of the run with enforcement on the try.
I have heard it said that officiating football isn't rocket science, but it isn't basketball either!

doesn't mean he's right.....

[mcrowder]

I've never been to a FED clinic or worked a FED game, but in reading the rules you guys post here, it sure sounds like if the 2nd runner had been tackled in the field of play, the penalty would have to be declined to get the benefit of the 2nd run... but your 8-2-2 and the other special enforcement blurb seem to indicate that this is exactly the type of situation where they want you to enforce on the try or kick - in other words, THIS is the exception or "special situation" in which 8-2-2 kicks in.

But this is just one NCAA guy's opinion.

[jumpmaster]

Looking at 10-6 and the example plays and rulings this is what I found...(emphasis mine)
"The...fumble...not part of the run itself. However, they are part of the entire play, which is a running play. The basic enforcement spot for a foul which occurs during any part of of the running play, including the run or while the ball is loose during the play, is the spot where the run ended.

Casebook play 10.5.3b - During a touchdown run by A1, B1 holds...Ruling: The touchdown stands if the penalty for B1's foul is declined.

I think that this implies that the penalty enforcement would be from the end of the first run.

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by JAZZMAN
I asked our state clinician about this play. He said that the foul occurred on the first running play and would have to be declined for the touchdown to stand.

REPLY: JAZZMAN...your state clinician is not correct. In fact, even if B's foul in this case was simultaneous with the snap, the TD would stand and the penalty would be enforced from the succeeding spot (try).

[GeorgiaBlue]

dangit - i thought i was convinced until jumpmaster points out 10-5-3- which directly contradicts itself in the case book - situation B states that the penalty must be declined in order to award a touchdown. Then you go to situation D which states that the penalty may be accepted and the touchdown awarded.

I really think situation B is messed up - they don't give options on that play....

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by GeorgiaBlue
dangit - i thought i was convinced until jumpmaster points out 10-5-3- which directly contradicts itself in the case book - situation B states that the penalty must be declined in order to award a touchdown. Then you go to situation D which states that the penalty may be accepted and the touchdown awarded.

I really think situation B is messed up - they don't give options on that play....

REPLY: GB...you're correct, and the Federation recognized their error.. On the NFHS website (look at "2004 Football Rules Interpretations") they tell you to delete Situation B form the Case Book.

http://www.nfhs.org/scriptcontent/va...ot=FB_FOOT.cfm

[GeorgiaBlue]

thanks.....

[Edited by GeorgiaBlue on Sep 28th, 2004 at 11:03 AM]

[jumpmaster]

Originally posted by GeorgiaBlue
thanks.....

[Edited by GeorgiaBlue on Sep 28th, 2004 at 11:03 AM]

ditto!