Rules RE: Declined Penalties
 

SCENARIO: Team A is on offense on the 8 yard line. Play ensues and Team A makes a touchdown. Penalty flags fly. There are two penalties against Team A. Team B declines both penalties, the referee signals each penalty followed by Team B’s decision to decline. The game announcer in the press box duly reports the activity and adds, “…Team B declines both penalties, so the touchdown is good.”

QUESTION: What’s the proper ruling?

Scott

Coach B is guilty of stupidity.

Or more likely...NEVER LISTEN TO ANNOUNCERS.

Chances are there were not 2 declined penalties against A when A scores, the announcer might have missed something, or the R might have signalled incorrectly. But if B declines both penalties against A then touchdown stands.

There is no ruling, partner. If team B declines the penalties, then that's their option.

Canadian Ruling
 

CANADIAN RULING:

Touchdown.

Declining a penalty means that your choice has been that the result of the play is more beneficial to you than the application of the penalty.

Since there are no cases in Canadian ball where B benefits from declining two A penalties where A scored a TD, I do wonder if there was a miscommunication somewhere along the line.

Hmmm.....

The only way that I can see there not being a touchdown is that if both fouls were pre-snap fouls, and the timing of the fouls was such that the officials didn't have time to kill the play prior to the snap, and decided to not do anything about it until after the snap, but still opted to give B the choice of applying at the PLS, without any benefit to A from the actual play.

Example: each WR mouths off to their respective sideline officials pre-snap and the official do not kill the play pre-snap. They flags come in during the play. These two fouls should be enforced at PLS, repeat the down. These are additive fouls, so B could decline the penalties, yet A would not be able to keep the TD, thereby "making" the announcer's statement incipiently incorrect.

Yes, an unlikely scenario, but this actually happened last night. The penalties called against Team A were "illegal procedure" (undefined) and "holding." The flags flew only after the play ended.

Yes, I know: NEVER listen to the announcer; what he/she says is irrelevant to the play of the game. The referee consulted with Team B's Captain, who made the decision to decline, then the referee signaled each call and each decline of penalty, but only at the point when the announcer said, "...so, the touchdown stands," and the officials signal TD, did Team B realized their stupidity.

The end result was that the referee went back to Team B and let them change their decision. Not only was the touchdown vacated, but Team A was assessed a yardage loss AND A LOSS OF DOWN.

Later, the game was called due to weather: lightening in the area that continued for a half-hour with another line of storms on the way. Despite the fact that it was a conference game, the score at initial cessation of play was allowed to stand.

My question is: Is it appropriate for Team B to be given a second opportunity to accept or decline the penalties?

Let me say I was not there and it would be unfair to comment on a collegaue's game without direct knowledge not that I doubt the poster's account.

It would/should never happen in a game that you allow declination of a penalty that gives the opposing team a touchdown. My statement in a situtation similar to this to the captain would be, "do you want to take the touchdown off the board?" and if I did not get a yes, I would confirm with a similar statement.

As officials we should never let the captain make the wrong choice.

As to whether they get a second chance, absolutely not, but if you have done your job correctly there would not be a need.

May I suggest a way to avoid any guilt feelings about allowing a team to make a second choice; When a team makes a decision that you consider insane (like declining an opponents foul to allow a score) presume that YOU gave a confusing (incomplete, mistaken, bad) explanation, and give yourself an opportunity to correct the situation by reviewing your explanation in a clearer fashion and allowing the captain to reconsider his choice in view of YOUR correction.

Should anyone object, simply advise them that your job is to provide complete and correct instructions and you will follow that objective for both teams, equally.

Ed Hickland That given, at what point does a decision stand -- in any situation, not just this example? Does a decision stand once the offical signals or is it open until the next play is run? How long does a team have to "change its mind?"

The Captain is entitled to make a ("a" as in one) decision once the options are presented to him properly and correctly. That's why it can be important to slow down an excited Captain and make sure he understands what's being explained to him and all the circumstances involved.

At the HS level you're dealing with someone 19 yrs old, or younger, and sometimes it takes a little effort to get the proper evel of attention to what you're explaining. If you're looking for, "one size that fits all", you're not going to find it on a HS football field.

It is incumbent upon the R to gather all the information and present the choice to the captain. Personally, I try to get the captain near his head coach so that if the decision is complex the coach will make the final decision. There is no time to change their mind once they make that decision.

Again, many penalty options are straightforward and I tell the captains and the head coach I'm going to just give them a wink when its obvious.

If the penalty requires some knowledge of the team's strength and preference then I will give the option. Example, 4/7 at K's 45, K8 runs into the kicker, the ball is downed at R's 3, a 5 yard foul and replay the down 4/2 at midfield or R with their backs against their goal line at their 3, 1/10. K will have to make the decision and once it is made that is what we go with.

I am not a believer in the "make the captain live with the stupid decision" camp. It will not endear you to anyone and, frankly, I find it bad for the game. That starts, with me, at the coin toss. I would never, never, NEVER allow someone to choose "kick" and saddle that team going on defense to start both halves unless after I explain it to them that's exactly what they wanted.

The latest NFHS version of the Bin Book talks about this and even suggests that in certain situations that the WH or wing should just get a decision from the coach. I completely agree with that. Last night we had 2 TDs with carryover penalties and since I was near the bench when reporting them, I just got the head coach's attention and verified he wanted the yardage on the kickoff.

We pulled them off with 6 minutes left and never finished. Regardless of whether it's a conference game, the rules clearly say that this decision is in the hands of the coaches and with their mutual decision we can end the game early. I don't care if there is a conference rule against that -- that's between the schools and the conference -- there's no NFHS (or state in my state) rule against it.

Hey, thanks, guys, for all the input.

Just one more request for clarification: regardless of how YOU would have handled the situation leading up to it and regardless of how stupid the decision was (remembering that at the time the coach on the sideline was on board with his team captain), once the decision was made and the official signaled it to the sidelines, do NFHS rules allow the team to then change their mind, and if they can, at what point is that oppotunity lost?

In fact, for clarity's sake, let's just take last night's scenario out of the picture. On ANY penalty call, at what point is a team's decision final?

What part of, "The Captain is entitled to make a ( "a" as in one) decision once the options are presented to him properly and correctly" are you having trouble with?

"Decision" signifies the end of the process, not the beginning or some mid-point, which is why the preliminary explanation of the options should be clear, concise, accurate and complete. Once the decision is made, our job is to implement it. There is no review, no further discussion, no ammendments.

What part of, "The Captain is entitled to make a ( "a" as in one) decision once the options are presented to him properly and correctly" are you having trouble with?

"Decision" signifies the end of the process, not the beginning or some mid-point, which is why the preliminary explanation of the options should be clear, concise, accurate, complete and perhaps most importantly understood. There is no time limit on assuring that the options are understood, but once the decision is made, our job is to implement it. There is no review, no further discussion, no ammendments.