substitution vs participation

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

Youngump asks a great question and the answer is simple you can stop play after it starts and call the dead ball foul.

*3.7 COMMENT, Page 26: a. If a replaced player or substitute attempts to leave the field, but does not get off prior to the snap, the foul is considered as having occurred simultaneously with the snap and the illegal substitution penalty is enforced from the previous spot. (3-7-4, 10-4-2a)

Since when can we stop play after it starts? Please do not quote from outdated books. Get yourself a 2008 rulebook and casebook and start reading for comprehension.

[Jimmie24]

Wouldn't we go into the fundamentals. No live-ball foul causes the ball to become dead.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by daggo66

Since when can we stop play after it starts? Please do not quote from outdated books. Get yourself a 2008 rulebook and casebook and start reading for comprehension.

Again, not my game, but it happens all of the time whether the rule book supports it or not. Whistle, mic comes on, dead ball, delay of game. Whistle, mic, Dead ball, fault start.

I think the analogy I'm making is this: Suppose in a basketball game they made backcourt a technical foul instead of a violation. A player catches the ball out of bounds in the backcourt and then steps in. Because this is so hard to follow in realtime (I know; but bear with me), he doesn't realize that the player is out of bounds until after he whistles the backcourt violation. But he's sure he didn't get there legally.

Or put another way in this scenario the only way the player can commit violation two is by getting away with violation one. I guess that's not so weird since he got away with something. But that's what's been bothering me.
________
Glass Pipe Pictures

[Jimmie24]

Originally Posted by youngump

Again, not my game, but it happens all of the time whether the rule book supports it or not. Whistle, mic comes on, dead ball, delay of game. Whistle, mic, Dead ball, fault start.

I think the analogy I'm making is this: Suppose in a basketball game they made backcourt a technical foul instead of a violation. A player catches the ball out of bounds in the backcourt and then steps in. Because this is so hard to follow in realtime (I know; but bear with me), he doesn't realize that the player is out of bounds until after he whistles the backcourt violation. But he's sure he didn't get there legally.

Or put another way in this scenario the only way the player can commit violation two is by getting away with violation one. I guess that's not so weird since he got away with something. But that's what's been bothering me.

You answered it already, those are dead ball fouls. A dead ball foul we do not allow the ball to become live.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Jimmie24

You answered it already, those are dead ball fouls. A dead ball foul we do not allow the ball to become live.

(I thought I did too with my third paragraph. But not with that one.)

So is illegal substitution. In all three cases the player violated a rule that should cause the ball to stay dead and the ball is made live. In the first two you go ahead and fix it but in the substitution case you instead call a live ball foul and penalize more.
That seems as weird to me as if the penalty for delay of game were 5 yards and the penalty for running a play after the play clock expired was 15.
________
StarryEyed

[hawkishowl20]

Originally Posted by youngump

(I thought I did too with my third paragraph. But not with that one.)

So is illegal substitution. In all three cases the player violated a rule that should cause the ball to stay dead and the ball is made live. In the first two you go ahead and fix it but in the substitution case you instead call a live ball foul and penalize more.
That seems as weird to me as if the penalty for delay of game were 5 yards and the penalty for running a play after the play clock expired was 15.

"If delay of game were 5 yards and the penalty for running a play after the play clock expired was 15." It is exactly like that only it is more important for officials to stop play in the substitution case for safety reasons. It is actually impossible to call participation when a substitution occurred without being guilty of neglect… blow it dead.

[hawkishowl20]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

"If delay of game were 5 yards and the penalty for running a play after the play clock expired was 15." It is exactly like that only it is more important for officials to stop play in the substitution case for safety reasons. It is actually impossible to call participation when a substitution occurred without being guilty of neglect… blow it dead.

It is like ignoring a defensive end lined up in the offensive backfield and than calling a personnel foul when he puts the quarterback in a stretcher. Neglecting one penalty in order to allow dangerous situations and than ignoring everything that led to that point. Like awaking from a slumber of neglect.

[PSU213]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

It is like ignoring a defensive end lined up in the offensive backfield and than calling a personnel foul when he puts the quarterback in a stretcher. Neglecting one penalty in order to allow dangerous situations and than ignoring everything that led to that point. Like awaking from a slumber of neglect.

OK, while I will not, once again, get drug too thourougly into this, I must make one comment: this is not a trial, we are not in court, and the is not the college debate club. You need to give up the unethical and neglect talk. Nowhere was it proved that the official acted maliciously (and, no, the supposed fact that he had his hand on his penalty flag before the snap does not in any way prove that the official knew the correct count before the snap). When you blantanly call an official unethical and accuse him of negelct, you better darn well have concrete proof of such violations. If you want to debate the rules, fine, but, please, don't drag what may be an honest man through the mud just because you want to prove a point.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

It is actually impossible to call participation when a substitution occurred without being guilty of neglect… blow it dead.

In your opinion coach. Counting players isn't the only pre-snap responsibility of officials. Don't forget the responsibility for having the correct amount of players on the field is yours, not ours. While we will shut it down if we can, we aren't forcing you to put too many players on the field.

OK I'm done, anything more is tilting at windmills.