Here is question number three guys what is the ruling? Please help....

B 1 intercepts a pass in his own end zone and attempts to run it out. He is hit while still in the end zone and fumbles. The ball rolls forward into the field of play and out of bounds at the B 4 yd. line. While the ball was loose during the fumble, (a) A4 committed a personal foul, or (b) B9 blocked below the waist at the 10 yd. line, or (c) B9 blocked below the waist in the end zone. How are the penalties enforced if accepted?

Sorry, yankeefan...you're not even close.

Basic spot is in the end zone, so in a.) A's penalty would be administered from the goal line...1st and 10 for B from the 15.

In b.) and c.) B's penalty results in a safety.

I gotta disagree on this one. In A, B and C the end of the run was in the end zone, making the basic spot the 20 (touchback). It is a running play that is beyond the neutral zone and the fumble is considered part of the running play, not a loose ball play.
In A the 15 yards will put the ball at the 35 1st and 10 for B.
In B since the foul is behind the basic spot then it will half the distance 1st and 10 from the 5.
In C again the basic spot is the 20 yard line, however since the foul occured in the end zone you would actually have a safety.

10.4.5 with subsection(d) reads "The basic spot is the succeeding spot: d. When the final result is a touchback."

This can only be referring to the final result of the play...it can't read that the basic spot is the succeeding spot if the basic spot is in the end zone. Otherwise, 10.5.4 would never occur "If the offense...commits any other foul for which the penalty is accepted and measurement is from on or behind its goal line, it is a safety."

fumbled.....
 

while agree with the decision that the penalty in the EZ is a safety, I do not agree with the rest.

I am just getting back into FB mode so bear with me.

if the fumble is indeed part of the running play and the penalties shall be enforced from the basic spot, or the all-but-one rule, would not one of the spots be enforced from the 4-yd line where the ball went OOB??

please correct me if I am wrong.

sidebar: in C couldn't it be justified as B trying to recover the fumble (provided he was near the ball)?

A) the penalty would be administered from the goal line since that is the basic spot, so 1-10 for B from the 15.

In B) and C) - safety.

C is a no-brainer so I'll look at the debate you have going on B. 8-5-2-c says it is a safety when "a player on offense commits any foul which is accepted and the enforcement spot is his EZ. 8-5-3-d says "a forward pass is intercepted in B's EZ and becomes dead there in B's possession. When B fumbled the ball out of the EZ and it went OOB's at the 2, the ball did NOT become dead in the EZ, so we do NOT have a TB.

I'm with rdfox and MJT.

Running Play.
Basic spot is end of run (EZ)

For A: for opponent's foul enforce from goal line (10-5-2)

For B and C: For teammate's foul enforced from EZ = Safety 10-5-4)

I think all of you need to read case book play 10-4-5-G and H.

They are slightly different though cuz in the 2 you mentioned the foul occurred before the fumble, so during a running play, and it the play that started this thread, the foul was during a loose ball play. That being said, I am trying to determine if that makes a difference, which I am thinking it does not.

REPLY: And this is my precise problem with the way the Fed has chosen to deal with this situation (read: head in the sand). The rules do not support the two case plays cited. And neither play contains any relevant information to determine when to apply the case ruling versus when to apply the rules as written. So we don't know what to do if the situation is "slightly (or even grossly) different." NF 10-4-5d says that the basic spot is the succeeding spot when the result of the play is a touchback. Neither of the case plays resulted in a touchback. Also, even if you want to take that giant leap, what's the 'succeeding spot' in the two case plays? In 10.4.5G (a) it's B's 2, and in (b) it's B's 5. Right? In 10.4.5H, it's B's 2. How did we get to B's 20? Until, and unless, the Fed gets its act together and writes the rules to cover this situation, we're going to be seeing these posts and hearing the arguments over and over. It's been 10 seasons (1996) since the Fed added the rule moving the basic spot to the suceeding spot when "...the final result of a down is a touchback" and we've been arguing about these two plays ever since. That change was made to remove a huge inequity in the rules and was a good change. Don't we think it's about time to have the rules 'catch up' with two rogue case plays that do nothing but cause confusion?