2005 NFHS RULE CHANGES

[kdf5]

Originally posted by Bob M.
REPLY: Sorry Kevin...It was 4th down and I meant for the IFP to be thrown incomplete from A's 2 yardline. B would normally take over 1st and goal from A's 1. In 2004, even for this play at the end of the period, he could have the ball for an untimed down. But with the new rule, since the 4th period ends and there's no extension because the penalty includes loss of down, B gets to go home with a loss. A clearly gains an unfair advantage by fouling. I'm not sure this is what the Fed intended. But we really need to see the final rule wording.

I'm probably the one confused. I was thinking of the play where A throws an IFP on, say, 2nd down at the end of the game and it's complete for a TD. B has the choice of giving up the TD or letting A have another shot, in effect giving A an advantage by fouling, same as your play. That to me seems as unfair as your scenario where B doesn't get the ball. My point was that there are situations in both '04 and '05 where B gets no love, no matter the rule.