Right Enforcement?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by mikesears

Keep an eye out for a possible change to this interpretation.

This is my whole point in this thread. The NFHS want to change a rule, they apparently communicate this to the Redding/Bin Book people, then they don't. Some states get the message, some don't, just horribly implemented.

[kdf5]

And sometimes the person writing for Redding/Bin Book/Case Book/whatever THINK that they are communicating an idea but a few words changed here or there or a horribly written sentence is all that's needed to change something from one idea to another. Like Mark Twain said, it's just one little word that changes lightning to the lightning bug.

[SouthGARef]

Not to bring up a dead horse, but the President of my association made an observation that I think settles the score.

Pg 80, Fundamental "X", #4:

"Penalty enforcement for any dead ball, nonplayer or unsportsmanlike foul is from the succeeding spot unless the foul occurs on a scoring play and the team chooses enforcement on the kickoff per 8-2-2, 8-2-3 or 8-2-4."

I think this settles it and allows for the live ball non-player or USC fouls on team A to be enforced on the subsequent kickoff.

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by SouthGARef

Not to bring up a dead horse, but the President of my association made an observation that I think settles the score.

Pg 80, Fundamental "X", #4:

"Penalty enforcement for any dead ball, nonplayer or unsportsmanlike foul is from the succeeding spot unless the foul occurs on a scoring play and the team chooses enforcement on the kickoff per 8-2-2, 8-2-3 or 8-2-4."

I think this settles it and allows for the live ball non-player or USC fouls on team A to be enforced on the subsequent kickoff.

Ok, so let's look at 8-2-2, 8-2-3 and 8-2-4.

8-2-2 talks about fouls by the opponent of the scoring team so it doesn't apply since the debate is over the scoring team's USC.

8-2-3 talks about fouls by the opponent of the scoring team and a change of possession so it doesn't apply (A's USC, right?)

8-2-4...If after a touchdown-scoring play and prior to the initial ready-forplay signal for the try, either team commits any foul for which the basic spot is the succeeding spot, the offended team may have the penalty enforced from the succeeding spot or may choose to have the penalty enforced on the subsequent kickoff.

8-2-4 gives a time frame for when the foul is committed. The foul must be committed AFTER a TD-scoring play and PRIOR to the initial RFP. A's USC foul was committed BEFORE the TD so 8-2-4 doesn't apply. The only rule that tells us when to apply A's USC is 10-4-5a which is the succeeding spot, which is on the try.

[SouthGARef]

Originally Posted by kdf5

Ok, so let's look at 8-2-2, 8-2-3 and 8-2-4.

8-2-2 talks about fouls by the opponent of the scoring team so it doesn't apply since the debate is over the scoring team's USC.

8-2-3 talks about fouls by the opponent of the scoring team and a change of possession so it doesn't apply (A's USC, right?)

8-2-4...If after a touchdown-scoring play and prior to the initial ready-forplay signal for the try, either team commits any foul for which the basic spot is the succeeding spot, the offended team may have the penalty enforced from the succeeding spot or may choose to have the penalty enforced on the subsequent kickoff.

8-2-4 gives a time frame for when the foul is committed. The foul must be committed AFTER a TD-scoring play and PRIOR to the initial RFP. A's USC foul was committed BEFORE the TD so 8-2-4 doesn't apply. The only rule that tells us when to apply A's USC is 10-4-5a which is the succeeding spot, which is on the try.

I get what you're saying, I truly do.

But the fundamental here gives a very clear impression that the NFHS intends for this foul to be enforced by giving the option to B to enforce on the kickoff. The fundamental contradicts the rule. The rulebook, therefore, contradicts itself.

With the evidence of the fundamental, the Reddings Guide, and the Bin Book... I think it's clear the NFHS wants the option to be given to provide for a kickoff enforcement. I think to deny that is to refuse common sense for the purpose of being too literal.

[Mike L]

Common sense tells me you can rarely get in trouble by doing what the rule book tells you to do. As kdf5 pointed out, all the fundamental tells you to do is read the rules in question to get your answer. The wording of the applicable rule is pretty clear.
Did the rulesmakers intend for B to get a choice on live-ball A USC fouls during a score? I believe they did.
Did the ruleswriters word the rule to allow for that choice? Obviously not.
So, you can go with what everyone thinks they intended to do or go with what they actually did. I'm in the latter camp simply because I'm a believer in doing what the rules say (& I don't have to come up with some "story" to justify my call).

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Mike L

Common sense tells me you can rarely get in trouble by doing what the rule book tells you to do. As kdf5 pointed out, all the fundamental tells you to do is read the rules in question to get your answer. The wording of the applicable rule is pretty clear.
Did the rulesmakers intend for B to get a choice on live-ball A USC fouls during a score? I believe they did.
Did the ruleswriters word the rule to allow for that choice? Obviously not.
So, you can go with what everyone thinks they intended to do or go with what they actually did. I'm in the former camp simply because I don't have to come up with some "story" to justify my call.

I don't need to justify anything. NFHS rules don't allow protests.

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by SouthGARef

I get what you're saying, I truly do.

But the fundamental here gives a very clear impression that the NFHS intends for this foul to be enforced by giving the option to B to enforce on the kickoff. The fundamental contradicts the rule. The rulebook, therefore, contradicts itself.

With the evidence of the fundamental, the Reddings Guide, and the Bin Book... I think it's clear the NFHS wants the option to be given to provide for a kickoff enforcement. I think to deny that is to refuse common sense for the purpose of being too literal.

SouthGARef: The Fundamentals are great, and this fundamental is point on. You go to the succeeding spot unless you can choose enforcement under 8-2-2, 3, or 4, which you can't.

[SouthGARef]

Originally Posted by kdf5

SouthGARef: The Fundamentals are great, and this fundamental is point on. You go to the succeeding spot unless you can choose enforcement under 8-2-2, 3, or 4, which you can't.

Say what you wish, and we can agree to disagree.

I think the fundamental listed here makes it very clear that the penalty may be carried over to the kickoff.