Wouldn't the game be over considering that the penalty for an illegal forward pass includes a loss of down?

Yes, the loss of down provision would prevent A from running an untimed down.

Canadian Ruling
 

CANADIAN RULING:

We don't have this hole in our rules. A pass like this is called an offside pass (subject to penalty). Since it is not defined as a foul, there is no "one more play" situation. Offside passes (subject to penalty) are penalized, when accepted, as the ball being dead at the point of origin of offside pass.

Edit: just read the responses mentioning the loss of down.... good to see there is no hole in teh US rules. :)

Thanks guys. I agree the game would end. Some of the vets in my chapter need to study more !!!! Anyway, if this situation happened and there was time on the clock... Team A would more get the ball at the 15. 1st and 10 .correct ?

Fortunately, we're not that screwed up. :D

Raider, yes they would. They earned the yards up to the 10 yard line. Now when does the clock start? :)

clock starts when the chains are reset / on the ready

Why?

Looks like on the snap as TD stopped the clock.

The screw I think should be changed is the ability of the team with the ball to give up a safety on last down, which is really what the situation described is about. If that's not changed (to make it a TD instead of a safety), then, what's the big deal about this play situation in NCAA? Once the QB faded into the end zone, he could've kneeled to concede a safety, so what's the big deal about allowing him to concede a safety via intentional grounding?

Robert

Yeah, that was an infamous one until a couple years ago or so when Fed realized the anomaly and changed it so an accepted loss of down penalty doesn't extend a period.

Robert

And a couple of years ago we considered the following situation.

A trails by 2 with 0:10 left in the 4th quarter. 1st and 10 on A's 45. A sets-up in shotgun and sends 4 receivers on streaks (a-la the Hail Mary). The 5th receiver, A2, bubbles underneath to about B's 30. QB A1 throws to A2. As B comes up for the tackle, A2 throws an IFP at B's 25 to A3, now behind the B defenders, who runs in for the TD. Time expires on the play.

If B declines, A wins the game on the TD. If B accepts, we have 1st and 10 on B's 30 and an untimed down. A lines-up and kicks a field goal to win.

Of course, we'd have fans and coaches screaming and yelling that the game can't end on a defensive penalty, not knowing the rules.

Now, with the provision to not extend a period on an accepted penalty that incudes a loss of right to replay the down, this cannot occur.

But the question is: What is the mechanic to signal this?

Certainly you indicate the penalty (IFP), point to A. Then what? Just hold the ball over your head to indicate the game is over?

How about interpolating the LOD signal between the foul signal and the ball over the head?

REPLY: Au contraire, friend from the north. The Federation change a few years back was made because precidely the play that raiderfan posted occurred and the period was extended allowing Team A to kick the winning field goal. In a 'knee-jerk" reaction, the Fed came up with the current rule which says that the period is not extended when the foul includes loss of down.

Now, that's all well and good when Team A is behind and is trying to illegally squeeze out another play in which to score, but what about this:
PLAY: Clock is stopped after a timeout. Team K leads 7-6 and has the ball 4th and 10 at their own 12. 0:06 remains in the 4th quarter. In a scrimmage kick formation, there's a bad snap that K1 can't control. It's rolling at K's 2. Seeing that R will either recover the ball with time remaining or will down him with time remaining, he picks up the ball (0:03 remaining) and flings it into the 18th row beyond the sideline. Clock expires during the play. RULING (2007): Since the penalty for an illegal forward pass includes LOD, the period is not extended. Sorry R...we're going home!

Here, Team K was ahead and used the new rule in order to commit a foul which allowed them to end the game. This rule needs to be changed to give the offended team the option of extending the period or not.

I agree with Bob M.