A Challenge!

[a4caster]

Sometimes used example is whatever helps them/hurts them the most. This is not a perfect example, as there are times where the opposite happens. But for the most part, it works. CIP; running play, A clips, runner goes 30 yds. You wouldn't subtract it from the end of the run; hit them where it hurts the most - the spot of the foul. The only time this doesn't work is on a pass play where B fouls (hold, BIB) and the pass is made over 10 yds. PS is the LOS, so either take the penalty or decline, it's still usually a 1st down. Only exception is if it was down and +10 yds. Then, you get to replay the down. So there are not perfect templates, but game knowledge comes into play alot. Give it time; it took me a long time to get the hang of it as well. Once you do, it all clicks!

[Bob M.]

REPLY: No offense a4caster, but I cringe whenever I hear someone recommend usng a "Hit them where it hurts the most" philosophy as a shortcut to proper application of the all-but-one philosophy. Consider:

Play 1: A22 runs to B's 45 where he is tackled. B12 commits a personal foul during the run at B's 40.

Play 2: A, 3-10 from midfield. Back A2 fumbles at A's 45. While the ball is rolling loose, guard A65 holds at A's 48. A13 recovers and is down at A's 40.

Play 3: During a scrimmage kick, R15 holds downfield at R's 30. R22 fields the punt at R's 20 near the far sideline. He circles back toward the opposite side of the field where he's tackled at R's 15.

In all three of these cases, someone following the "Hit them where it hurts the most" philosophy would invariably get it wrong.

[a4caster]

Very true, and that is why I said that it wasn't a perfect fit, but a large part of the time, it does help get things done. But, I see where you are coming from that if someone does not learn the correct way, they will never learn the correct way.

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by a4caster

Very true, and that is why I said that it wasn't a perfect fit, but a large part of the time, it does help get things done. But, I see where you are coming from that if someone does not learn the correct way, they will never learn the correct way.

REPLY: Precisely my point...if they rely on the shortcut and never learn the correct application, they'll get things wrong.

[JugglingReferee]

Thanks to all.

[kdf5]

I've also heard the "all but one" referred to as the "3 and 1". If you hear someone say the 3 and 1 you'll be in the know.

[JugglingReferee]

Is the all-but-one principle the same for each of the NFL, NCAA, and NFHS?

Are there any differences between the codes? I know that the NFL has exception after exception in penalty enforcement, so perhaps the Fed and college are exactly the same, or very close in penalty administration?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: No offense a4caster, but I cringe whenever I hear someone recommend usng a "Hit them where it hurts the most" philosophy as a shortcut to proper application of the all-but-one philosophy.

I agree. If you really hit them where (i.e. going back to when) it hurt them the most, you'd go back to the bus they came in on, deeming that they never arrived, and they'd forfeit the game.

But seriously folks, all-but-one (or as it used to be called, three-and-one) is a reasonable compromise (one of several possible) between ease of administration and equity. When the defense fouls during a run, it's usually a safety-affecting thing, but when it affects the game tactically, it'd be difficult to impossible to figure out how they hurt the offense yardage wise, so the entirety of the associated run counts. When the offense fouls during a run, it's more often tactical in some way, and the enforcement approximates the idea that the player who was fouled against might've made the tackle right there. But sometimes the spot of a foul doesn't have that relationship to the associated run, and enforcing from that spot, if behind where the run ended, is pretty arbitrary.

The Canadian PBH (point ball held -- at the moment of the foul) spot I think does better w.r.t. the equities, but is harder to administer because it may not be in the official's view at that instant.

Some enforcement spots are very much divorced from the effect a foul might've had on play. There've been 2 philosophies regarding how to penalize non-deliberate pass interference by the defense: use the spot where the interference occurred, or the previous spot. Neither is much of a remedy in a case where a high lobbed pass is accompanied by interference far short of where the ball came down, and where the receiver might otherwise have been able to run to catch it. But only rugby uses the spot where the ball lands as an enforcement point for an equivalent type of interference (on a kick).

Robert