"You are getting to hung up on the phrase, "The action that causes the down to end did not also stop the clock".

I do get hung up on interpreting the rules correctly.

"After a change of possession, we simply have an officials timeout. The clock starts on the ready after an official's timeout UNLESS something else happened to stop the clock. Runner out of bounds, incomplete pass, ball out bounds, etc".


Don't forget an interception.

On the ready, in both cases. Add my vote to that side.

Consider this - is there a play in which an interception does not lead to starting the clock on the snap? The answer is yes. Therefore, it is not the interception itself that caused you to start it on the snap. It's something else (in this case, the awarding of a new series to B) - and in the case of the play being discussed, you do not have that.

Start it on the ready.

Those claiming to start the clock on the ready are missing the secondary part of stopping the clock...the reason for stopping the clock also includes the provision for starting it.

An incomplete pass stops the clock AND stipulates that it's started again on the next snap.

A loose ball out-of-bounds stops the clock AND requires the clock to start on the next snap.

An intercepted ball that is in B's possession at the end of the play, causes the clock to stop and re-start on the snap.

An intercepted ball that is in A's possession at the end of the play, causes the clock to stop and re-start on the ready.

Every stoppage of the clock already has a rule for when it's to re-start. You do not break that rule because of penalty enforcement!

If the end of the play did not call for a clock stoppage, and a penalty occured during the down, then you have a clock stoppage for penalty enforcement which requires you start the clock on the ready.

There should be no controversy here!! The original play for this posting had the clock stop because B was in possession after an interception. So right then and there, the clock is set to re-start on the snap. You can't change that just because a penalty occured during the down. It restarts on the snap.

kdf - you don't stop the clock because of an interception!

Since when?

My Quote
"You are getting to hung up on the phrase, "The action that causes the down to end did not also stop the clock".


I do get hung up on interpreting the rules correctly.


Hung up was a bit incorrect. I think you are interpretting the rule incorrectly. I'm not trying to be argumentative but you have not interpretted them correctly. Seven of us interpret the rules to mean it starts on the ready for play. Just because you believe differently doesn't automatically make your interpretation correct.

[/i]My Quote
"After a change of possession, we simply have an officials timeout. The clock starts on the ready after an official's timeout UNLESS something else happened to stop the clock. Runner out of bounds, incomplete pass, ball out bounds, etc".[/i]


Don't forget an interception.

I hope you don't stop the clock after an interception. I hope you wait until the ball is dead. It is the ACTION that causes the ball to become dead (i.e that causes the down to end) to determines when we start the clock.

Question: What actions cause the ball to become dead? Of those actions, which cause the clock to start on the snap and which ones cause the clock to start on the ready?



[/b]

Mike: you know that I mean stopping the clock after the interceptor is down. I've said so a couple of times here.

Let's take a look at the reasoning behind the rule to help further our case for ready-for-play.

I believe the rulebook used to start the clock on the RFP even after a change of posession. I believe the NF changed the rule to say that it should start on the snap after a change of possesion becaues they felt A should be allowed to substitue without time running off the clock.

In this case, NEITHER team will need to substitute because the foul by B negated their own interception. A's offense will still be out there. B's defense will still be out there. Neither team will be required to do massive substitutions.

I still haven's seen you answer to my question. What actions cause a down to end? Of those, which ones cause the clock to stop?

Mike: Like Bob said I'll answer yours when you answer mine.

I have. We don't stop the clock after an interception PER RULE. We stop the clock for an officials' timeout after an interception when the player is down. Do we ALWAYS start the clock on the snap after an official's timeout?

this conversation seems to remind me a lot of the "discussion" we had at my local meeting on Tuesday night when I brought up this question.


I am more inclined to start it on the ready after reading many of these posts...HOWEVER, i believe there needs to be a casebook play on this to get an official ruling from the NFHS

OK Bob. Don't see where anybody else answered your question, so I will.

Clock starts on the whistle (RFP).


Your turn Bob. :)

Serg

VA - what makes Bob's scenario and the original scenario different (with regards to when you start the clock)...

Nothing.

ksf - Since When? Since a few years ago. The timing of when we stopped doing that is irrelevant to the discussion. Show me the rule that says you stop the clock after an interception and start it on the snap. You can't. There isn't one. There is, in fact, a case in the CB in which you don't. So obviously it's something else causing you to start it on the ready after 99% of the interceptions. That thing is the one thing that is missing from the original scenario here. So you don't start it on the snap in the CB play, and you don't start it on the snap on the original scenario.

I am doing some digging in the books, thinking, and bouncing back and forth before I come back with my big reply, but Bob, your question is not remotely the same. There is no COP, which is the "potential" problem here. Obviously in your question, it starts on the RFP, but there was no COP, so that is a no brainer.

When we took the Part II test in GA (made a 94, wohoo, not so wohoo as my goal was to break my score last year... a 94) the test giver guy (official name ;) ) discussed this very play. Said everyone was disagreeing (about 60/40 on the RFP) and that the NFHS wouldn't touch the question. Find that hard to believe, but that's what he said.