Twist on 8-2-2

[jkumpire]

I think I know the answer already, but this might be something for people to chew on. At a local rules meeting last night the questions was asked: "If A is allowed to have penalties on scoring plays applied to the kickoff, can the defense do the same thing?" He had found no rule that said they could not.

I.E. On the try A1 commits live ball USC, and A Scores the conversion. Can B ask for the yardage to be applied to the succeeding spot (i.e. on the kickoff)?

Coherent thoughts, if any?

[MNBlue]

No.

8.3.5 addresses fouls by B on successful trys and 8.3.6 addresses fouls by A on unsuccessful trys. 8.2.2 addresses touchdowns.

In both 8.3.5 and 8.2.2, the scoring team is given the choice of replaying or enforcing from the succeeding spot. No where is B given the opportunity to decide to replay or enforce from the succceeding spot.

[wisref2]

This is a good example of not only reading the rules, but comprehending what you read (and not reading anything into them). That includes referring to other related rules.

Don't have my book handy so I can't quote - but it clearly states that on touchdown plays in which there is a foul by B, A has the choice of enforcing the penalty on the try or the ensuing kickoff. (same holds true for a TD after change of possession).

Since it doesn't say B can do the same thing, then B can't do it - just like they can't shoot a runner with a shotgun to prevent him from scoring. You won't find that in the rule book, but it can clearly be inferred in the equipment rule.

[andy1033]

If A comits an USC on a good try. the foul is enforced on the kickoff. USC are treated as dead ball fouls.

[KWH]

Consider this play:
After an two unsportsmanlike penalties have been enforced against A the try is from the 33 yard line.
A1 throws a forward pass to a wide open A2 who catchs the ball on the B-15 yard line, after making the catch A2 high steps for 5 yards points the ball at defender B66 and then dives into the endzone from the 2 yard line with no defender in close proximity.
RULING: The two point try is good. The unsporsmanlike conduct penalty by A2 will be enforced from the succeeding spot. The kickoff or the start of overtime.

[Daryl H. Long]

After reading the posts in this thread there are a few things I would like to nitpick if I might. There is no disrespect intended to any of the posters but am only using how they wrote something to teach.

Since I am usually accused of being long winded (ie Preacher) I will split up my replies into smaller postings.

[Daryl H. Long]

Originally Posted by jkumpire

I think I know the answer already, but this might be something for people to chew on. At a local rules meeting last night the questions was asked: "If A is allowed to have penalties on scoring plays applied to the kickoff, can the defense do the same thing?" He had found no rule that said they could not.

In short, the question asks if B can be given the option if they score. The answer is Rule 8-2-2 applies to both A and B. It even could apply to R. All that is required is to apply the proper team designation to 8-2-2.

Team designation is defined in 2-43.
2-43-1: Offense = team in possession of the ball.
Defense = team not in possession of the ball.

2-43-2: A = Team putting ball in play. B = opponent.
2-43-3: K = Team who legally kicks ball. R = opponent
2-43-4: Team designations (A and B, K and R) are retained until the ball is next marked ready for play.

So during any down A, B, K, and R does not change. The only thing that can change is offense/defense.

The question as given above compares A and defense as if they are never the same. As written it assumes that A is always on offense and is the only team that can score, and and B is always on defense. That is not true. Team A and the defensive team could be the same team.

Play: A1 drops back to pass and throws an interception to B1 who runs the ball back for a touchdown.

The play starts with A on offense and B on defense. When B1 intercepted B changed to become the offense and A changed to defense. B is the team that scored because they remain B throughout the down.

[Daryl H. Long]

Originally Posted by jkumpire

I.E. On the try A1 commits live ball USC, and A Scores the conversion. Can B ask for the yardage to be applied to the succeeding spot (i.e. on the kickoff)?

Coherent thoughts, if any?

MNBlue, Andy, KWH, anare all in agreement. The answer is NO.

This question assumes that B has an enforcement option similar to that of 8-2-2 or 8-3-5.

The penalty will be administered at the succeeding spot whether B wants it to or not. B does not get a choice in that decision.

10-4-5a is the appropriate rule to apply.

What choice does B get? 10-1 gives two options.
1. Accept or decline the foul. 2) Accept or decline the yardage.

If decline foul: K will free kick from 40 yard line.
If accept foul but decline yardage: K will kick from 40 yard line.
If accept foul and yardage: K will free kick from 25 yard line.

[Daryl H. Long]

Originally Posted by wisref2

This is a good example of not only reading the rules, but comprehending what you read (and not reading anything into them). That includes referring to other related rules.

Don't have my book handy so I can't quote - but it clearly states that on touchdown plays in which there is a foul by B, A has the choice of enforcing the penalty on the try or the ensuing kickoff. (same holds true for a TD after change of possession).

Wise words to begin with. Read carefully and comprehend what you read are important. Equally as important is when we paraphrase a rule we should not use terminology that is incorrect or confusing.

Wiseref tries to quote the rule using team designations A and B as if A is the only team that can score and is afforded options. The fact of the matter is the rule does not use team designations at all. It just states that when a team scores a touchdown and there is a foul by the opposing team, the scoring team gets a choice of administering the penalty at the succeeding spot (try) or on ensuing free kick.

Originally Posted by wisref2

Since it doesn't say B can do the same thing, then B can't do it - just like they can't shoot a runner with a shotgun to prevent him from scoring. You won't find that in the rule book, but it can clearly be inferred in the equipment rule.

Yes, B can do it. As I said above the scoring team mentioned in 8-2-2 could be A, B, or even R. I will leave it to you to make your own applications to each team designation.

Additionally silence in the rules does not mean prohibited as stated above.

Read 2-37 carefully. This is the definition of "RULE" which gives things you may assume and not assume.

[Daryl H. Long]

Originally Posted by KWH

Consider this play:
After an two unsportsmanlike penalties have been enforced against A the try is from the 33 yard line.
A1 throws a forward pass to a wide open A2 who catchs the ball on the B-15 yard line, after making the catch A2 high steps for 5 yards points the ball at defender B66 and then dives into the endzone from the 2 yard line with no defender in close proximity.
RULING: The two point try is good. The unsporsmanlike conduct penalty by A2 will be enforced from the succeeding spot. The kickoff or the start of overtime.

There are limitations to 8-2-2. They all apply to the end of a half (2Q and 4Q).

The foul can NEVER be carried over to 2nd Half or Overtime if the foul occurred on the last timed down of the half.

See Situation 5 in 2007-08 NFHS Football Rules Interpretations on NF website.

The ruling given is what the Rules committee intended but I admit that better terminology is needed than what is currently written to support the ruling. Rule 3-3 needs specific guidelines to determine whether or not to extend the period in light of 8-2-2. If that is what KWH meant by his in his post then I wholeheartedly agree.

[KWH]

Originally Posted by Daryl H. Long

There are limitations to 8-2-2. They all apply to the end of a half (2Q and 4Q).

The foul can NEVER be carried over to 2nd Half or Overtime if the foul occurred on the last timed down of the half.

See Situation 5 in 2007-08 NFHS Football Rules Interpretations on NF website.

The ruling given is what the Rules committee intended but I admit that better terminology is needed than what is currently written to support the ruling. Rule 3-3 needs specific guidelines to determine whether or not to extend the period in light of 8-2-2. If that is what KWH meant by his in his post then I wholeheartedly agree.

Yes, that is exactly what I was saying, AND,

Restated, under the current 2007 NFHS rules, if, during the last timed down of ANY period, a live ball foul is committed by the opponent of the touchdown-scoring team, and the penalty is accepted, the penalty must be enforced either on the try, or the period must be extended for an untimed kickoff.

And furthermore, there is NEVER a situation where, if, during the last timed down of ANY period, a live ball foul is committed by the opponent of the touchdown-scoring team, and the penalty is accepted, that the penalty may be carried over to the next period or the start of OT. There is no current rule support to ever allow this option!

My 2 cents

[andy1033]

Only one is a foul by defense on a good fg. The period is not extended for this..

[wisref2]

What I'd like to know is this. Why is it up to us to figure all this out?

All of these interpretations should have been put out as part of the communications of the rule change. Frankly, I don't think the Federation understood the real implications of what seemed to be a pretty easy, and good, rule change.

Heck, this wasn't even covered at our rules interpretation meeting. They just skipped over it saying it was pretty simple.

Reminds me of the basketball change a few years ago redefining player control to include during an interrupted dribble. The Federation never realized that made it possible to call a timeout as the ball was rolling down the floor!

At the time, I suggested that they form an advisory committee of active officials (there are few, if any, actual officials on the rules committee) to review their changes to identify things like this.

It's unacceptable for this type of thing to happen. They've set us up for failure because, unfortunately, very few officials actually participate in these kinds of forums. They just go out on Friday and work a game and don't even realize what this rule really means.

Rant over.

[KWH]

Originally Posted by andy1033

Only one is a foul by defense on a good fg. The period is not extended for this..

Andy-
If you read my post is both cases I refer (as does rule 8-2-2) to fouls by the opponent of the touchdown-scoring team

I have yet to see a "good fg" on a touchdown-scoring play!

However, yes, you are correct in that fouls listed in 3-3-4 are excluded from period extension procedures...

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by wisref2

At the time, I suggested that they form an advisory committee of active officials (there are few, if any, actual officials on the rules committee) to review their changes to identify things like this.

Doesn't always work. I know a league that had current officials and retired players on such an advisory committee, but when it came time to write the actual rule book, the league shoved them aside and turned out the worst P.O.S. of a rule book for football I'd ever seen.

Robert