It's about 6 weeks until our season starts. With that in mind here's a play:

4/10 for A from its own 5 yard line. A1 drops back into his end zone and throws a legal forward pass. Linebacker B2 deflects the pass, which is caught by A1. Still in his endzone, A1 throws a forward pass to eligible A3 that is (a) incomplete or (b)complete to A3 at A's 27 yard line. Ruling?

Starting this year this second pass is now illegal. So in (a) it is a safety without choice. Either accepting the penalty or declining leave A with possession of the ball in their own endzone. 8-5-2c, 7-5-3 In (b) B can decline the penalty and let A have a first down on A-27. If B accepts the penalty then it is a safety.

The second forward pass was an illegal forward pass and the penalty is from the spot of the foul (A's endzone) so the option for accepting the penalty would be a safety.

In a) it is a saftey if the penalty is declined and in b) it would be A's ball 1st and 10 from the 27.

I got this question from the Fed's Preseason Guide 2005. Their answers: In (a), B may decline the penalty and begin a new series on A's 5 yard line, or accept the penalty to score a safety. In (b), because the foul occured in the endzone, B will score a safety if it accepts the penalty. Declining the penalty would result in a new series for A.

Do these answers seem right???

I don't believe they gave a complete answer in A. In situation A they should be able to decline the penalty and still have a safety in that situation as jdlj and warrenkicker said so I don't believe their answer is completely correct. I'm thinking they would also have the option of declining the penalty and putting the ball in play as the fed has stated.

This is something that they really need to look at. B should be able to decline the penalty and take the ball at the PS since we had an incomplete pass on 4th down. That is a rule technicality that screws B over if they are more in need of 6 points than 3 at the very end of the game.

The rules committee could even say it is that is a way of declining the "distance" part of the penalty, which can be done. I realize that is not exactly what is being done, but it would make that an option for B, and thus solving the problem.

Did the Fed list a rule reference for this opinion?

REPLY: They better not have. There's is no such rule. As others have said, the result of the play is a safety. Whether B accepts or declines the penalty for the IFP, the result is the same--2 points for B. In Federation rules, there is no option that would allow B to take over at A's 5. In NCAA rules, there is.

I'm confused...you guys are obviously confident that you are right, but if A1 throws an incomplete pass on 4th down and the penalty is declined, why wouldn't B take over on downs at the 5?

Well it has something to do with the rule 8-5-2c.

ART. 2 It is a safety when:
c. A player on offense commits any foul for which the penalty is accepted and enforcement is from a spot in his end zone; or throws an illegal forward pass from his end zone and the penalty is declined in a situation which leaves him in possession at the spot of the illegal pass and with the ball having been forced into the end zone by the passing team.

So we don't have the option of letting B decline the penalty to get the ball. It is a safety either way.

Now if they really wanted to let us let B decline the penalty and take the ball over instead of taking the safety then there would have to be two different rules written for illegal forward passes. One for when the pass was attempted from in or behind the neutral zone and another for when the pass was attempted from beyond the neutral zone.

Then this would consider the illegal pass from in or behind the neutral zone to be part of a loose-ball play and thus the spot of the foul would only be a spot for enforcement and not the end of a run. This way the play would only end in an incomplete pass and if the penalty was declined then the ball would go back to the previous spot.

While if the pass was attempted beyond the neutral zone then this is all a running play (just as the rule is written today) and thus the spot of the foul is also the end of the run. This way an illegal pass 80 yards down field would not bring the play all the way back to the previous spot.

An illegal forward pass is treated as a run. Therefore the end of the run is in A'a own endzone. Therefore it's a safety either way. Either the penalty is enforced from the end of the run, which is in the EZ or if declined the end of the run is still in the EZ, safety.

So, in situation (a) it's a safety whether the penalty is accepted or declined. In (b) it's a safety if the penalty is accepted and A's ball 1/10 at A's 27 if declined. Is this correct?

The dead ball spot (where the ball is placed) for any declined illegal forward pass is from the spot of the illegal forward pass.

If A were to throw an illegal forward pass from the A-1 yard line and B declined the illegal forward pass penalty, the ball is placed at the A-1 yard line.

REPLY: The NCAA would allow B to take over as if it were an incomplete <u>legal</u> forward pass, but their manner of doing so is with an exception for IFPs that occur on 4th down. Except for those, their enforcement is pretty much the same as Fed's.

I'm in agreement with this. On the fed's answer do guys think they want us to interpret (better stated, enforce) this the way they do for NCAA, albeit without a rules reference to go along with it? They have been known to do this before (ie: redefining the end of the run). All of you may think my question here is quite stupid but I'm thinking they just published this freakin guide and HAD to have proofread it first.

For now, if I have this happen on the field I got safety baby, either way! I realize this slightly contradicts my earlier post but I have given this much more thought and I have no evidence within the rules to allow B to take over.

[Edited by ljudge on Jul 21st, 2005 at 05:22 PM]