NFHS

3rd & 10 for A at A-40. While running with the ball, A2's facemask is grasped and pulled by B1 at A-45. A2 shakes off B1 and continues running when he is hit and fumbles the ball at the B-45. Teammate A4 then recovers and runs for a touchdown.

-------------------------------------------------

What are the scenarios if A (a) accepts the face-mask penalty or (b) declines the face-mask penalty?

[Edited by Cruser on Sep 23rd, 2004 at 08:52 PM]

Declining the penalty would result in the TD.

The basic spot for accepting the penalty would be the end of the related run, so it would be the spot of the fumble. The penalty would either be 5 or 15 depending on the official's call.

I do not believe any of the recent rule changes modified the "related run" basic spot theory, so I would not give them the option of assessing the penalty on the succeeding spot (on the try).

Canadian Ruling
 

In Canada, the TD stays, at half the distance on the convert or 15 on the kick-off.

NF

Enforce it on the try!

8-2-2
If during a touchdown, a foul by the opponents of the scoring team occurs, the scoring team may accept hte results of the play and have the penalty enforced from the succeeding spot.

These were my thoughts as well. Since the basic spot for enforcement is at the spot of the fumble (where the related run ends), I do not believe they get the option to enforce the penalty from the succeeding spot, which would be the try. Therefore, they would decline the penalty.

Biglaz, I do not believe 8-2-2 applies here (NF).

Biglaz, I do not believe 8-2-2 applies here (NF). [/B][/QUOTE]

This play is exactly what 8-2-2 applies to.

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).

So 8-2-2 does apply - enforce it on the try!

I've been taught that unless there is a change of possession, a foul by B on an A scoring play the basic spot "changes" to the succeeding spot due to 8-2-2.

Enforce it on the try.

OK, thanks guys. So, under 10-5-1f this would be a special enforcement rule and 8-2-2 would apply. That makes sense.

NFHS RULE 10.4
The basic spot is the spot where the related run ends for a foul which occurs during a running play as defined in 10-3-2.

RULE 10.3.2
A running play is any action not included under Article 1, other than those defined in 2-31-1a.

RULE 10.3.3
The end of the run is:

a. Where the ball becomes dead in the runner's possession.
b. Where the runner loses possession if his run is followed by a loose ball.
c. The spot of the catch when the momentum rule is in effect.

Accordingly A would have to decline the penalty in order to keep the touchdown.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by HSrookie

Quote:

Originally posted by Cruser Accordingly A would have to decline the penalty in order to keep the touchdown.

No. 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.

HSrookie,

Your thoughts on this play were the same as mine originally. However, under special enforcement rule 10-5-1f, I now believe that 8-2-2 applies to all plays in which a touchdown was scored and there was not a change of possesion.

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.

We have been told the opposite. That being said, I think a lot of trouble could be cleared up if "play" were replaced with "down" in 8-2-2.

Perhaps they want us to think about where the penalty would be enforced from. On this play, the spot of enforcement would be the end of the associated run at B-45. Now if there was no fumble and the penalty still occurred as described then the spot of enforcement would be the end of the run at the goal line. But because the ball can't be moved further into the endzone and "really" make it a touchdown we are told to enforce it at the succeeding spot. So I would say that on the play as described they might want us to have A decline the penalty to keep the touchdown. However the book, as written, does not support this idea.

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?

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.

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.....

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.

my 2 cents
 

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.

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).

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

thanks.....

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

ditto!