Help on NCAA caseplays
 

I may be misquoting, but I know I have the intent correct of these two caseplays. I'm not sure I "get" the intent of their answer though, as it seems to disagree with the rules.

1) 2nd and goal at the 3. Runner for team A is downed at the 1 yard line, where Team B piles on. Subsequently, Team A retaliates for the late hit by punching the Team B player.

Ruling - offsetting fouls, 3rd and goal at the 3.

To me, these fouls are distinct and separate, even though we had not yet administered the first foul. Seems, from the way I read the rules, that we should be at the 15 1/2.

2) After an interception, B80 taunts a pursuing tackler prior to scoring a TD. After he crosses the goal line, the pursuing tackler A88 tackles B80 5 yards into the endzone.

Ruling: Try for point after from the 3.

Again, to me, these fouls, while both administered as dead ball, are not offsetting, but are consecutive and separate - and we should be at the 9.

Tell me what I'm misreading.

Don't feel bad, it has been a sticky point with many NCAA officials. The intent is to not let the case where one foul may be half the distance for one team and then the full 15 for the other team.

Most Refs hang their hat on the fact that since no penalty has been enforced yet for either teams foul, then both of those fouls cancel. 10-1-5-excp.

Ejections do not cancel and are always completed.

Just another one of those NF/NCAA diffs.

I'm not a FED guy, so it's not a rules-confusion thing. It seems to me from reading the NCAA rules that only simultaneous dead ball fouls should offset, and that order DOES matter. Can't find a rule to lead me to rule the way the caseplays do.

I agree with you.
Seems the fouling order can be determined most of the time. Then the WH goes with the portion of the rule that says for UC or personal foul penalities not yet completed to cancel both out and he does just that.

Odd thing is on the few times I know this happened, the coach on my sideline was telling me (sort of as a loaded question) that the fouls will cancel right?
So they seem to have that understanding as well.

I agree that Theisey's response is the correct result. The 10-1-5 exception would apply here (2 DB UC's or PF's where neither foul enforcement had been "completed").

However since the down does count the result of the play stands and it should be 3rd & goal @ the 1, not the 3.

The same 10-1-5 exception applies to play 2

Also remember that not all DBF's are Unsportsmanlike or Personal Fouls. Under the AR's in 10-1-5 it shows some scenarios with 5 yard dead ball fouls on plays in which there is also a late hit. These types of scenarios are where you apply the first part of 10-1-5.