Penalty in the end zone

[jimmiececil]

In the July 2002 edition of Referee magazine on page 58 it has the following case play:

Team A's ball, first and 10 on team B's 25 yardline. A1's pass is intercepted in team B's end zone by B2, whose facemask is immediately grabbed and twisted by A3. B2 fumbles and the ball rolls into the field of play and out of bounds at team B's three yardline. What are team B's options?

RULING: Team B would be wise to accept the penalty. By declining the penalty, team B would be choosing the result of the play and would begin a new series at its own three yardline. The penalty, if accepted, is enforced from the end of the run. In the play, that is the spotf at which B2 lost possession. Since that spot is in team B's end zone, the penalty is enforced from team B's 20 yardline. The result is first and 10 for team B from its own 35 yardling(NFHS 10-3-2, 10-3-3b;NCAA 10-2-2c-2)

Here is my problem. This exact same caseplay was in the Fall 2001 edition of the NFHS Officials' Quarterly and its ruling was that "Since the final result of the play is NOT a touchback, the enforcement spot is B's goal line if the penalty is accepted. First and ten for Team B on their 15 yard line.

My question is : Which is the correct ruling?

Thanks to all who respond and please indicate the rule if you find it.

Jim Cecil

[BktBallRef]

This play has been discussed over and over again. Basically, there's a hole in the NF rules with regards to this play. However, in this year's case book, 10.5.2B Comment states: Any loose ball that occurs after a run ends in the end zone is ignored in determining the basic spot for penalty enforcement.

In the above play, if the loose ball is ignored, the basic spot is the 20 yard line because A forced the ball into the EZ and B gained possession in the EZ. Therefore, the enforcement spot is the 20, 1st & 10 from the 35.

[jfurdell]

I think the reasoning behind this is that the face-mask foul could have played a part in causing the fumble. Therefore we give Team B the benefit of the doubt and award the touchback.

[Mike Simonds]

However, while it is true that B gained possession of the ball in their endzone, the ball did not become dead there in B's possession. The final result of the play was not a touchback, rather, the fumble rolled out of bounds at B's 3 yard line. Therefore I believe A's facemask foul should be enforced from the goal line.

In order for a touchback to be ruled I believe these 3 requirements have to be met: 1. A's pass forced the ball into B's end zone. 2. B intercepts the pass in the end zone. and 3. The ball becomes dead there in B's possession.

Here is a similar play at the other end of the field: A's ball 1st and 10 at their 2 yard line. A1 drops back into his end zone and gets tackled by B1 who grasps and twists A1's face mask. Since the result of the play is safety (A forced the ball into their own end zone), A will probably accept the penalty that will be enforced from the goal line. The result would be the same if A1 fumbled the ball into the field of play because A1's run ended in the end zone.

Looking forward to hashing and rehashing these plays!

[BktBallRef]

Mike, you're completely correct, if you only look at the rulebook. But we can't do that. We have to use the case book in combination with the rule book. In this situation, there is a hole in the rules. But the case book is clear. Any loose ball that occurs after a run ends in the end zone is ignored in determining the basic spot for penalty enforcement.

For lack of any other information about this particular play, we have to go with what's written in the case book. Prhaps they'll make the necessary editorial changes in next year's rule book.

[jimmiececil]

Thanks for each response. I have forwarded the question to Referee magazine and the response received indicated that the ruling in the magazine was incorrect and that they are publishing the correction in future editions.

This is a situation that must be addressed by the rule book. This is a play that I have fortunately not had during a game, but it sounds like something that is very possible.

Can you imagine how a coach would react to this ruling! Yikes!

[Edited by jimmiececil on Jul 10th, 2002 at 11:36 AM]

[mikesears]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
Mike, you're completely correct, if you only look at the rulebook. But we can't do that. We have to use the case book in combination with the rule book. In this situation, there is a hole in the rules. But the case book is clear. Any loose ball that occurs after a run ends in the end zone is ignored in determining the basic spot for penalty enforcement.

For lack of any other information about this particular play, we have to go with what's written in the case book. Prhaps they'll make the necessary editorial changes in next year's rule book.

I totally agree with you, especially about the casebook being a supplement to the rulebook.

Recall the casebook is also the ONLY place where you find any information about the 'where's the tee?" play just as it is the only place where we find information to rule on the play originally posted here.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by jimmiececil
Thanks for each response. I have forwarded the question to Referee magazine and the response received indicated that the ruling in the magazine was incorrect and that they are publishing the correction in future editions.

This is a situation that must be addressed by the rule book. This is a play that I have fortunately not had during a game, but it sounds like something that is very possible.

Can you imagine how a coach would react to this ruling! Yikes!

Well Jimmie, I'm afraid the NFHS disagrees with REFEREE magazine. The NF says that the penalty will be marked off from the 20 yard line. Now, who's knows more about NF rules, the NFHS or REFEREE?

How would you handle this play?

From a field goal formation, potential kicker A1 yells, "Where's the tee?", A2 replys, "I'll go get it" and goes legally in motion toward his team's side-line. Ball is snapped to A1 who throws a touchdown pass to A2. What's the ruling and where can I find it in the rule book?

[STEVED21]

BBR,
Do you REALLY want to start this again??

[mikesears]

Originally posted by STEVED21
BBR,
Do you REALLY want to start this again??

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by STEVED21
BBR,
Do you REALLY want to start this again??

You mean re-hash this play. Nah! I'm just trying to point out to Jimmie that not everything can be in the rule book. We have to rely on the case book as well.

That's all.

[jimmiececil]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

You mean re-hash this play. Nah! I'm just trying to point out to Jimmie that not everything can be in the rule book. We have to rely on the case book as well.

That's all.

I do appreciate your response. In the Fall 2001 NFHS Officials' Quarterly on page 21 in Situation # 18, the ruling indicates: If the penalty for A1's facemask foul is declined, a new series is awarded to Team B at the out-of-bounds spot. Since the final result of the play is NOT a touchback, the enforcement spot is B's goal line if the penalty is accepted. First and ten for Team B on their 15-yard line.

This is the ruling by the NF in their quarterly letter. That is where I saw the case play in the first place. So which ruling by the NF is correct?

[BktBallRef]

The ruling from the Fall 2001 Quarterly was the initial ruling but it was changed last year. The wording in this year's casebook was a direct result of the discussion that occurred from the newsletter play. We discussed this play at length last year on the McGriff board and it popped up again this year. Here's the link to the latest discussion on this play.

http://www.gmcgriff.com/refonline/ww...ges/26409.html

Some of the most knowledgable posters on the McGriff board replied to the post such as SRH, Tom Heisey, and Bob M. Take a look!

[Theisey]

Are you saying that there have been two different NFHS rulings on a play like this since last year? I suppose I should say I'm not surprised. Regardless, Referee Magazine has it wrong.

However, there is definitely a rules problem in regard to what should happen when there is a foul on the opponent when a run ends in the end zone and the final result of the play is neither a TB or a Safety.
NFHS should put something in rule 10 and add a case book example to cover this.

My own two cents from past local discussions and on various internet sites, is enforce the penalty for this case from the goal line since the run ended behind the goal line.
This case being as described in the first post

[jimmiececil]

I do appreciate all of the responses. When the case play came out in the Fall of 2001, I questioned some fellow officials and did not get a good explanation. After a while, my question basically faded away as the season did. Then it popped up again in Referee magazine and I just wanted an explanation. That is why I searched for a web site to pose the situation to referees who would have the answer.

Even though I do understand the reasoning on both sides and I certainly realize that we must rule on it the way the federation dictates, I just wanted some expert opinions.

This has been a great way to get feed-back and I appreciate each reply.

From my own standpoint, I think the ruling of administering the penalty from the 20 yard-line basically assumes that there had been a touchback. At no time in this particular play is there ever a mention that the ball became dead in the endzone and the play resulted in the touchback. I understand the concept that the ball was forced into the endzone by Team A and if nothing else had happend more than likely there would have been a touchback. But, going back to the basic rules of administering the penalty, the spot of the foul occured in the endzone. I also see the advantage that Team A receives in ruling this way and of course we are always taught to administer according to what hurts the team that was penalized the worst. Yet as indicated by the many responses, there is no definite ruling in the rule book, but there happens to be a case book situation that explains the correct way to handle the situation. But of course this is my opinion.

Thanks again for every response and I will continue to visit this web site more often and look for the discussion. I DO APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK AND YOUR HELP.