What do u do?

[rookie09]

If the football is on A's 5 yard line.And its 2nd and 10.a false start ios called on A22.how would you called this penalty?at what time would you stop going half the distance to the goal line?

[ppaltice]

I think you know the answer to your first question is it is half the distance to the goal line, 2 and 12 1/2.

Never had it happen, but 9-9-2 covers repeated fouls that halve the distance to the goal line. The game is forfeited. No set number, but I would not allow a team to make a travesty of the game.

[mbyron]

Here is the text of the rule.

Originally Posted by Rule 9-9-2

No team shall repeatedly commit fouls which halve the distance to
the goal line.
PENALTY: Unfair act – the referee enforces any penalty he considers equitable,
including the award of a score – (S27). Repeated fouls (Art. 2) – the game may
be forfeited.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by rookie09

at what time would you stop going half the distance to the goal line?

When it became obvious they were no longer interested in playing football, and only after a warning. Before you get to a forfeit, the rule whose current numbering in any code I don't know, which allows time to be taken out until the ball is put in play when it appears a team is fouling to consume time, should be invoked. I could see few situations where a team would then continue to see advantage in stalling like that: waiting for a replaced player's cut to stop bleeding, or for darkness to fall, or expiration of some time limit on their permit to use a shared field.

Some codes allow the award of a safety instead of a forfeit in such cases.

Robert

[Time2Ref]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Some codes allow the award of a safety instead of a forfeit in such cases.
Robert

Which codes will allow the award of a safety on a false start?

[ppaltice]

Originally Posted by Time2Ref

Which codes will allow the award of a safety on a false start?

Rule 9-9-2 and 1-1-6. This is an unfair act and the referee can rule any penalty he feels is 'equitable,' including a safety, touchdown or even game forfeiture.

[Texas Aggie]

I can't envision a scenario in which an offense would repeatedly commit fouls inside their own 5. After at least the second one -- and maybe the first depending on the circumstances, the clock wouldn't start until the snap, so we'd be in dead time. If for whatever reason it continued, I'd bring in the QB and either find out what the deal was, or if I knew (assuming it was because they are pissed at a call/no call/other), I'd explain to him clearly that I expect him to get control of his team and run a play properly, and that any ejection that might happen would result in a report to and appearance before the state association.

Assuming we have a team that wants to cause trouble, the problem with awarding a safety is that it won't solve anything. After a safety, they will attempt a free kick and might try other shenanigans then. I don't think in Texas we'd have a problem here because a coach here trying to pull a stunt like this wouldn't last long. Yelling at the officials, even to the point of getting written up, is acceptable to other coaches. Refusing to play or making a mockery of the game isn't. If a visiting team, for example, screwed up a homecoming in this way, there'd be hell to pay.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

I can't envision a scenario in which an offense would repeatedly commit fouls inside their own 5. After at least the second one -- and maybe the first depending on the circumstances, the clock wouldn't start until the snap, so we'd be in dead time.

You don't have to envision them, I already did upthread. They'd be rare, but all involve a reason to use up, not game time, but real time.