Options??

[Theisey]

Well yes, by a foul I never had a doubt they are impling an accepted foul nor do I believe they meant a deadball foul after the play is over. But that doesn't mean the down has to be replayed as in the second play where the foul had an LOD part that really didn't have an affect on the enforcement.

Sorry, but I'm being very stubborn on this one.
Anyone feel like contacting NF for an official interpretation? I'll stick my tail between my legs if it comes back different than how I see it at this time.
Both plays should be submitted.


Oh well, I have to move off of football soon and move into the spring sports real soon, like really now. So any future replies by me will be far and few. If anyone does get an interpretation, please email it or a point me back to this forum.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: I'll refer the plays to Steve Hall, the state interpreter for New Hampshire. He seems to have had at least some success in getting answers back from Diehl. The rest of us peons aren't so lucky. The best I've received is his out-of-office e-mail. Let me make sure I've got it straight. The two plays we're considering are:
1. the original one I posted with A holding at B's 5, and
2. same play with A throwing an IFP at B's 5.

Right?

[MJT]

Those are the 2 plays.

Theisey, you will be missed! You always are great in discussions!

[Bob M.]

REPLY: Tom...missed your last sentence, but I understand that track & field calls! We'll keep a light on for you here till next season. Have you thought any more about the ECAC? And I will most definitely send you an e-mail when (if!!) we can get an answer from Diehl. You've got my e-mail...masucci AT att DOT com. Keep in touch, and I'll let you know about Ed Camp's spring clinic when he calls me with the info.

[Theisey]

Thanks guys, I'll keep in touch. The discussion, arguments, case plays have been great. I wish more officials would find these kinds of sites and join in.
I'll email you soon Bob about the ECAC. If anyone else wants to talk off line, just send an email my way. I'll be glad to talk with ya.

Originally posted by Bob M.
R signals for and makes a fair catch at midfield. On the ensuing down, A22 runs for a TD. A65 holds B at B's 5 yardline. Let's discuss the options for dealing with this situation...and don't forget the clock. Federation and NCAA will differ.

Decline: A TD
Accept: A 1-10 @ B15 and choice of a free kick or snap
Clock: Snap

[DrMooreReferee]

Quick question regarding the clock on this subject.

Lets assume A does have the option of free-kicking after they've ran a play following the fair catch. Lets say the clock would have started on the ready. Would it still start on the ready if the team was free-kicking?

[MJT]

Originally posted by DrMooreReferee
Quick question regarding the clock on this subject.

Lets assume A does have the option of free-kicking after they've ran a play following the fair catch. Lets say the clock would have started on the ready. Would it still start on the ready if the team was free-kicking?

The clock always starts when the ball is touched, other than 1st touching by K, for a free kick. 3-4-2 says "The clock shall start on the RFP other than a free kick if the clock was stopped for...

[Bob M.]

REPLY: DrMooreReferee...MJT is correct that on all free kicks, the clock starts when the kick is legally touched. However, at one time (prior to 1991) under the conditions that you proposed, the clock would have started on the ready for the free kick. But those days are past! Now, for all free kicks, the clock starts when the kick is legally touched.

[Suudy]

Originally posted by Bob M.
REPLY: DrMooreReferee...MJT is correct that on all free kicks, the clock starts when the kick is legally touched. However, at one time (prior to 1991) under the conditions that you proposed, the clock would have started on the ready for the free kick. But those days are past! Now, for all free kicks, the clock starts when the kick is legally touched.

So let's talk about situation A. A's ball, 1st and 10 from the 15. A chooses to free-kick. Expand it to say there is 2 seconds left in the game. A kicks through the uprights, scoring a FG.

So on A's free kick (after the FG), the clock will still have 2 seconds, right?

What if A is farther back, say the 35. On the free kick, B1 jumps up in the EZ in an attempt to block the kick from going through the uprights. The ball hits B1's hand then goes through the upright (It still scores an FG, right?). Does the clock start on the touch since the ball is in the EZ?

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by Suudy
So let's talk about situation A. A's ball, 1st and 10 from the 15. A chooses to free-kick. Expand it to say there is 2 seconds left in the game. A kicks through the uprights, scoring a FG.

So on A's free kick (after the FG), the clock will still have 2 seconds, right?

What if A is farther back, say the 35. On the free kick, B1 jumps up in the EZ in an attempt to block the kick from going through the uprights. The ball hits B1's hand then goes through the upright (It still scores an FG, right?). Does the clock start on the touch since the ball is in the EZ?

REPLY: Obviously, not the type of situation you'd see very often, but...

So on A's free kick (after the FG), the clock will still have 2 seconds, right? Correct.

The ball hits B1's hand then goes through the upright (It still scores an FG, right?) Correct again...the ball touched by B in B's endzone remains alive only for the purpose of scoring.

Does the clock start on the touch since the ball is in the EZ? This is the tough one, since it's so rare, but I would say no, the clock doesn't start at all on this play. Why? Look at the exception to rule 4-2-2d(2). It says, "EXCEPTION: If a scoring attempt touches an upright or crossbar or an R player in the end zone and caroms through the goal, the touching is ignored and the attempt or try is successful." (underlining is mine for emphasis). Since it says, .the touching is ignored..."that (to me) is an indication that the free kick hasn't been touched and the clock should not start.

What do you think?

[Suudy]

Originally posted by Bob M.
Does the clock start on the touch since the ball is in the EZ? This is the tough one, since it's so rare, but I would say no, the clock doesn't start at all on this play. Why? Look at the exception to rule 4-2-2d(2). It says, "EXCEPTION: If a scoring attempt touches an upright or crossbar or an R player in the end zone and caroms through the goal, the touching is ignored and the attempt or try is successful." (underlining is mine for emphasis). Since it says, .the touching is ignored..."that (to me) is an indication that the free kick hasn't been touched and the clock should not start.

What do you think?
[/B]

I agree, both from a rules standpoint (good eye for 4-2-2d) and from a practical standpoint. If the ball caroms off B's hand, then through the upright, by the time you start winding it will have gone through. So it makes sense not to wind it from a mechanical standpoint as well.

[dumbref]

Originally posted by mcrowder
Well, I disagree 100%.

If this were a 1st and 10 play that went only 3 yards, the LOD after the 5 yard penalty would make it 2nd and 12, correct? You're not replaying the down, so in this sitch, a free kick would not be allowed.

So make the play go 12 yards. Team A achieved the line to gain, but after the penalty it's 2nd and 3. LOD. No replay of down. No free kick allowed.

Back to the play in question then - team A goes more than 15 yards. 5 yard penalty and LOD, although since team A is still across the LTG, it's actually 1st and 10 again. Surely we are not allowing a freekick here after a LOD penalty is enforced against A, simply because the play before the penalty went more than 15 yards. This goes against the very principle of not allowing a penalty to HELP the offending team.

I believe the "LOD has no significance if..." part is to keep us from stupidly beginning a new series as 2nd and 10 after a penalty like this. (If the book didn't have this phrase, there would be some who would contend that LOD on a play like this DOES warrant a 2nd and 10 - since this is not what the framers wanted, they put in this phrase). It's my contention that this phrase was not meant to say we "replay the down" if Team A achieved a 1st down, which would in turn allow the freekick based on the other rules.

Your thoughts?

This has been a great discussion question and I respect the opinions on both sides of this debate.

6-5-4:
"ART. 4… The captain may choose to free kick or snap anywhere between the inbounds lines on the yard line through the spot of the catch when a fair catch is made or through the spot of interference, when a fair catch is awarded. These choices remain if a dead ball foul occurs prior to the down, or a foul or an inadvertent whistle occurs during the down and the down is replayed.

The question is - does the phrase “and the down is replayed.” apply to both “a foul” and “inadvertent whistle”? Now I am certainly no English major, but grammatically the way it reads, I think it applies to both. The case play is the one that gives me a problem and where I disagree with some of you.

6.5.4 SITUATION: R1 signals for a fair catch beyond the neutral zone on K's 40. K2 interferes with R1's opportunity to make the catch. R chooses an awarded catch and to put the ball in play with a snap. During the down: (a) A1 gains 15 yards and the coach of B is charged with an unsportsmanlike foul; or (b) B2 commits pass interference; or (c) an inadvertent whistle sounds during A1's forward pass. RULING: In (a), the unsportsmanlike foul during the down does not give A another choice to snap or free kick. However in (b), A may snap or free kick following penalty enforcement. In (c), the down is replayed and A has the option to snap or free kick. (10-4-4a)

In (b), team A retains the option to free kick. But with DPI - we are not replaying first down, we are awarding a new series of downs. (5-1-1) “… Each awarded first down starts a new series of four downs.”

My deduction of this - the phrase “and the play is replayed” only applies to an inadvertent whistle. If that is true, fouls with LOD would not change A’s options. A comma after the phrase “a foul” would clarify it if that is the NF intentions.

Now that is my interpretation of the the rule. This is my opinion: I think any foul by A should cause the forgiet of A's option to free kick. And the way the rule reads grammatically contradicts the case play.

BTW – The phrase “a foul” refers to a player foul. 2-16-2f

[Edited by dumbref on Jan 19th, 2006 at 01:03 PM]

[i]This has been a great discussion question and I respect the opinions on both sides of this debate.

6-5-4:
"ART. 4… The captain may choose to free kick or snap anywhere between the inbounds lines on the yard line through the spot of the catch when a fair catch is made or through the spot of interference, when a fair catch is awarded. These choices remain if a dead ball foul occurs prior to the down, or a foul or an inadvertent whistle occurs during the down and the down is replayed.

The question is - does the phrase “and the down is replayed.” apply to both “a foul” and “inadvertent whistle”? Now I am certainly no English major, but grammatically the way it reads, I think it applies to both. The case play is the one that gives me a problem and where I disagree with some of you.

6.5.4 SITUATION: R1 signals for a fair catch beyond the neutral zone on K's 40. K2 interferes with R1's opportunity to make the catch. R chooses an awarded catch and to put the ball in play with a snap. During the down: (a) A1 gains 15 yards and the coach of B is charged with an unsportsmanlike foul; or (b) B2 commits pass interference; or (c) an inadvertent whistle sounds during A1's forward pass. RULING: In (a), the unsportsmanlike foul during the down does not give A another choice to snap or free kick. However in (b), A may snap or free kick following penalty enforcement. In (c), the down is replayed and A has the option to snap or free kick. (10-4-4a)

In (b), team A retains the option to free kick. But with DPI - we are not replaying first down, we are awarding a new series of downs. (5-1-1) “… Each awarded first down starts a new series of four downs.”

My deduction of this - the phrase “and the play is replayed” only applies to an inadvertent whistle. If that is true, fouls with LOD would not change A’s options. A comma after the phrase “a foul” would clarify it if that is the NF intentions.

Now that is my interpretation of the the rule. This is my opinion: I think any foul by A should cause the forgiet of A's option to free kick. And the way the rule reads grammatically contradicts the case play.

BTW – The phrase “a foul” refers to a player foul. 2-16-2f
[/B]

I think it applies to all three. I do see the problem of casebook play. I am researching more in to it....you've got me thinking...LOL

[Bob M.]

REPLY: Here's how I would reword NF 6-5-4 if it were up to me (it isn't!!). Mind you, it reflects how I believe the rule is to be interpreted, so some might disagree with the wording for that reason.

6-5-4:
"ART... 4 The captain may choose to free kick or snap anywhere between the inbounds lines on the yard line through the spot of the catch when a fair catch is made or through the spot of interference, when a fair catch is awarded. These choices remain if:
(a) a dead ball foul occurs prior to the down
(b) the penalty for a foul (other than non-player or unsportsmanlike) that occurs during the down is accepted and the foul does not include the loss of the right to replay the down
(c) an inadvertent whistle occurs during the down and the down is replayed."