Is it a safety if B declines penalty?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Indy_Stu

All -

Thanks for the posts. I agree an IFP is a penalty, for that matter any infraction that is accepted results in a penalty. Maybe a different way to state the question is, if a penalty is declined was there a penalty? B declined in the given situation.

Okay. B declines the penalty. The end of the run is the end zone. We can't snap the ball for the next down in the end zone, can we?

[JasonTX]

NCAA is different than Fed on this one. A couple years ago the NCAA rule was the same as Fed, but now the NCAA has an exception to this. If thrown from the end zone, the offended team can decline the penalty and take the "artificial" incomplete pass.

[Indy_Stu]

Fair enough, thanks for the input. One last though . . .

I guess I am having trouble with two points. One, B declined the penalty. An infraction occurred that was declined. B should have choices. Table 7-5-2 does classify intentional grounding as an illegal forward pass. Yes end of run in the end zone, blah blah blah. Why can't B decline penalty and take results of play, in this case an incomplete pass. They may want to decline and go for TD?

One more scenario that involves IFP: QB A12 takes snap and drops 5 yards deep into the end zone and throws forward pass (legal) to end A80. End A80 catches pass then throws long forward pass (2nd FP, so IFP) from 1 yard deep in end zone.
a) Ball is intercepted inbounds and returned for a TD by B. Snap, first run ends, loose ball, another run ends, second loose ball, followed by run. B would choose to take results of the play which is a TD. They decline the penalty to take results of the play.
b) Same scenario, but pass falls incomplete. There is no run following the last loose ball. B declines penalty. End of run was in the end zone, followed by IFP. B declines penalty, maybe because it was 4th down and they want to try for TD.

Does B have to take a safety in both IFP scenarios - - intentional grounding and 2nd FP?

[kdf5]

Indy_Stu: It seems to me that you are hung up on the illegal forward pass being incomplete and going back to the previous spot. If an IFP is thrown from the EZ and incomplete then you have safety no matter what because even though it's a pass and it's incomplete it's still a running play as far as any penalty enforcement and the all but one. An incomplete IFP is the same as if the QB was sacked in the EZ. I think you've got that concept, right?

If an IFP is thrown from the EZ and it's complete then you have a different set of cirucmstances. What you have is a completed pass. If B intercepts an IFP (thrown from EZ), they CAN decline the safety and keep the ball. The issue is an incomplete IFP - it is a run and the end of the run is the spot where the ball was thrown. I hope I didn't beat to death something you already know. If so, I apologize.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Indy_Stu

Fair enough, thanks for the input. One last though . . .

I guess I am having trouble with two points. One, B declined the penalty. An infraction occurred that was declined. B should have choices. Table 7-5-2 does classify intentional grounding as an illegal forward pass. Yes end of run in the end zone, blah blah blah. Why can't B decline penalty and take results of play, in this case an incomplete pass. They may want to decline and go for TD?

Please stop blah, blah, blahing and read what we're trying to tell you. You're not listening to us. You're blah, blah, blahing over the most important part of the play.

The result of the play is not an incomplete pass. It's an incomplete illegal forward pass. The result of the play is a run that ended in the end zone. On a incomplete legal forward pass, the ball goes back to the previous spot. On an incomplete illegal forward pass, the ball is marked at the end of the run. The play is just as if A1 had been tackled in the end zone because that's where the run ended.

One more scenario that involves IFP: QB A12 takes snap and drops 5 yards deep into the end zone and throws forward pass (legal) to end A80. End A80 catches pass then throws long forward pass (2nd FP, so IFP) from 1 yard deep in end zone.
a) Ball is intercepted inbounds and returned for a TD by B. Snap, first run ends, loose ball, another run ends, second loose ball, followed by run. B would choose to take results of the play which is a TD. They decline the penalty to take results of the play.

b) Same scenario, but pass falls incomplete. There is no run following the last loose ball. B declines penalty. End of run was in the end zone, followed by IFP. B declines penalty, maybe because it was 4th down and they want to try for TD.

Does B have to take a safety in both IFP scenarios - - intentional grounding and 2nd FP?

a) The end of the play is NOT a run that ended in the end zone. Touchdown.
b)If incomplete, then the play ended with a run by A in B's end zone. It's no different than being tackled there. Safety.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: Indy_Stu...let's give this one more try: The rule which governs placement of the ball for the next down says:
"If the pass is legal, the passing team next snaps the ball at the previous spot, unless lost after fourth down." There should be no problems here.

Now, if your question was intended to ask "Why doesn't the Federation have a rule like the NCAA's which would allow the ball to be placed at the previous spot?" then there's merit to the question. And it needs to be directed to the Federation Rules Committee for consideration through your state committee member, Mr. Cox.

But if your question is indeed "Why can't B decline (the) penalty and take results of play, in this case an incomplete pass," asked in the context of the current Federation rules, then it's simply without merit. The rules are very clear that the ball is placed at the spot of the end of the run. Hence, safety regardless of whether the penalty is accepted or not.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: Indy_Stu...let's give this one more try: The rule which governs placement of the ball for the next down says:
"If the pass is legal, the passing team next snaps the ball at the previous spot, unless lost after fourth down." There should be no problems here.

Now, if your question was intended to ask "Why doesn't the Federation have a rule like the NCAA's which would allow the ball to be placed at the previous spot?" then there's merit to the question. And it needs to be directed to the Federation Rules Committee for consideration through your state committee member, Mr. Cox.

But if your question is indeed "Why can't B decline (the) penalty and take results of play, in this case an incomplete pass," asked in the context of the current Federation rules, then it's simply without merit. The rules are very clear that the ball is placed at the spot of the end of the run. Hence, safety regardless of whether the penalty is accepted or not.

Not to pile on, but it's simply not seen as an incomplete pass. It's a run that ended. Toss your beanbag, cause you're going to need the spot.

[MD Longhorn]

Wait a minute...

Are you saying that in FED that B cannot decline Intentional Grounding and accept the result of the play? What if the result of the intentional grounding was actually an intercepted pass, returned for a TD by B? In Fed, did the pass in essence never occur?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Wait a minute...

Are you saying that in FED that B cannot decline Intentional Grounding and accept the result of the play? What if the result of the intentional grounding was actually an intercepted pass, returned for a TD by B? In Fed, did the pass in essence never occur?

Of course they can take the result of the play. The result of the play in FED is the ball is spotted at the end of the related run prior to the illegal pass. Safety.

[MD Longhorn]

So in Fed, if a QB was about to get sacked, and just winged it to his left, where no receivers were, and this pass was caught by B, you nullify the interception merely because there were no A receivers in the area?

Not complaining, just trying to clarify this, since I don't work FED.

[Indy_Stu]

Thanks to all who courteously and unassumingly posted, to clarify this IFP situation to me:
waltjp
kdf5
HawkeyeCubP
whitehat52
JasonTX
Bob M.

Bob M. post at 10:51 helped seal the deal for me. I do not know NCAA rules as I only do HS football. This would be one situation (IFP from own end zone) that IMO would be good to unify the codes. I would like to see B have options, like they do on other enforcements.

Maybe I will direct this to Mr. B. Cox - - the next time we play golf!

[Bob M.]

REPLY: When you need to set the ball following an incomplete forward pass, you need to keep one thing in mind: The last sentence of the pertinent rule says, "If the pass is legal, the passing team next snaps the ball at the previous spot, unless lost after fourth down." For an illegal forward pass, the ball is returned to the end of the run (spot of the foul) as the others have said.

For those who might care, the NCAA has an exception that allows B to treat an incomplete illegal forward pass from A's end zone as if it were a legal forward pass, i.e. return it to the previous spot. PLAY: A, 4-10 from A's 5. A10 under duress, intentionally grounds a forward pass from his endzone.

NCAA RULING: B can take the safety (gets 2 points) and A will free kick from their 20, or B can take the ball 1 and goal from A's 5.

FEDERATION RULING: A is awarded 2 points for the safety. No other opions. A free kicks from their 20.

Sorry Jason...I didn't see your post when I posted my response.