Right Enforcement?

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

The rule book is frequently wrong or incomplete. That said, since I am presenting on various topics (including this one) at an association meeting tomorrow night I've emailed the state office for how we're to enforce this. I know how I see it, but I'd rather see consistency than see my viewpoint be the correct one.

Not to start a fight but how can the rule book be wrong?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by kdf5

Not to start a fight but how can the rule book be wrong?

It can contradict itself (say one thing in one place and something different in another) or can be incomplete. This is one place I think it's incomplete.

(Jim Evans has frequently cited over 200 errors in the official rules of baseball. You can't put every scenario in the book and have everything covered or consistent. It's not a book written by lawyers for lawyers.)

The enforcement of an USC foul by A during a score is as you said - succeeding spot. I do think they meant to give the same choice here as they gave in 8-2-4 -- or they bridged this part of the enforcement to the succeeding spot, which yields the choice given in 8-2-4 -- they just neglected to write the rule properly or rewrite another rule to make this happen.

I don't think that the Redding book and the Bin Book would get this wrong on purpose, either.

Step away and look at spirit and intent of the change. Why would this *not* fit?

That said, I'm more than willing to abide by the state office and how they decide. The message we'd been given all along is that enforcement is easy. The only time we have to apply on the try is at the end of the game and only under certain circumstances.

[kdf5]

The intent of these rule changes was to prevent B from getting in a cheap shot and only having to pay a penalty of a yard and a half.

8-2-2 and 8-2-3 refer to the opponent of the scoring team and 8-2-4 talks about fouls occurring AFTER the score and 10-4-5 says the basic spot is the succeeding spot for USC fouls, which is what A did before he scored. The succeeding spot is the try.

You say you think they meant to give the same choice but it's clear that the rules say what should happen.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by kdf5

The intent of these rule changes was to prevent B from getting in a cheap shot and only having to pay a penalty of a yard and a half.

8-2-2 and 8-2-3 refer to the opponent of the scoring team and 8-2-4 talks about fouls occurring AFTER the score and 10-4-5 says the basic spot is the succeeding spot for USC fouls, which is what A did before he scored. The succeeding spot is the try.

You say you think they meant to give the same choice but it's clear that the rules say what should happen.

This thread is the first I even considered that maybe it should be applied on the try. The way the change was presented was not this way at all, not where I am.

The bin book and Redding are quite specific -- the bin is: "Live ball fouls treated as dead ball fouls that occur during a touchdown" with the result being "Penalty Enforced on the Try or the Succeeding Kickoff".

I wouldn't be so confident that what's written is what is/was meant. Those who write these books are closer to the NFHS Rules Committee than I (and probably you) are or will be.

[Mike L]

This whole "live ball USC foul is enforced as a dead ball foul" is something that has crept into the enforcement of penalties philosophy when it actually is not there. All you really have is "The basic spot is the succeeding spot for an USC foul". The succeeding spot is the try in this situation despite what Bin or Reddings says. You can try to say giving B the choice is what the rule meant to do, but it's not what it says. Intent of the rule is nice to go by, but it's really hard to do that when the rules are clear in what they say. The only thing about the new 8-2 rules that apply to A says the foul has to be committed after the score and before the ready. They say nothing about A fouls committed during the score and definitely say nothing about live ball fouls treated with dead ball enforcement.
Taunting on the way in, on the try only.
Celebration after, B gets a choice.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by Mike L

. They say nothing about A fouls committed during the score and definitely say nothing about live ball fouls treated with dead ball enforcement.
Taunting on the way in, on the try only.
Celebration after, B gets a choice.

The reason they say nothing about A fouls committed during the score is quite simple. What team in their right mind would say, "OK let the score stand and we'll penalize them on the try." Of course not. Any live ball penalty against a scoring team would be accepted. Common sense prevails with the rule change this year allowing the dead ball to be on the KO, since it was dead B had no choice other the the subsequent spot. If a team has a good kicker, B might want it on the kickoff and now they have the choice.