Is it a safety if B declines penalty?

[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.

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

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.

In Fed it depends on where the pass was thrown from and whether it was completed or not. An incomplete illegal forward pass is a running play, not a passing play. A completed IFP is a completed pass but still a running play for enforcement.

An incomplete illegal forward pass thrown from in the EZ will be a safety since it's by rule (don't have books, can't cite rule number) a safety. Declined, it's a safety because the run ended in the EZ. An incomplete IFP from the field of play is treated the same - as a run. A completed IFP is simply a completed pass. Penalties out in the field of play are enforced using basic ABO enforcement.

Say, for example, that A throws a long illegal forward pass downfield from the A 45 and it was 4th and 10. B intercepts and is tackled on the B 20. B would accept the IFP which would give B the ball on the A 40 1/10 rather than keep the INT because the IFP has loss of down provisions and is enforced from the end of the run which is the A 45. I hope I didn't muddy this too bad.

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

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.

REPLY: No mcrowder...of course B can take the result of the play. And if they intercept the pass and take it to the house, good for them. But...if the pass is incomplete, the result of the play leaves the ball at the spot of the pass (safety). It cannot be placed at the previous spot like it would be for a legal forward pass. That seems to be what had Indy_Stu confused.

[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!