Right Enforcement?

[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.

[Mike L]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

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

Sure, because everyone appreciates officials who just make **** up

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Mike L

Sure, because everyone appreciates officials who just make **** up

Let's be honest - nobody other than the officials working the game would ever know the difference here.

And regardless of what anyone said, I can pull out the appropriate source and give a citation. Rule on the try, cobble together the rules. On the kickoff, well, here's the bin book and the Redding guide to explain those *complicated* rules.

This is one place I am not concerned whatsoever. I know the history, backstory, etc. better than any coach I'll run into. And 99.999999999% of the officials, too.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Let's be honest - nobody other than the officials working the game would ever know the difference here.

And regardless of what anyone said, I can pull out the appropriate source and give a citation. Rule on the try, cobble together the rules. On the kickoff, well, here's the bin book and the Redding guide to explain those *complicated* rules.

This is one place I am not concerned whatsoever. I know the history, backstory, etc. better than any coach I'll run into. And 99.999999999% of the officials, too.

It's easy to play "What would RichMSN do" on the Internet.

Today I had a kid turn and taunt an opponent while his teammate was about 50 yards downfield on his way to scoring on a 98 yard TD run. The flag was a no brainer. It was unsportsmanlike *and* vulgar.

First, I had to go over to the visiting sideline that was apoplectic that the TD would, indeed, count. Then the coach wanted enforcement on the kickoff.

And I wouldn't allow it. Yes, I would've gotten away with it and, yes, I think it's the most equitable solution and what the NFHS intended. And yes, I had to eat a bit more crap in denying it, considering the home team has an outstanding kicker and the 35 yard extra point was, essentially, a chip shot.

But they didn't write it this way and I got *no* response when I asked the state person in charge of football about this 3-4 weeks ago. Just no response whatsoever, and I am an officials' association coordinator.

So there you have it.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

It's easy to play "What would RichMSN do" on the Internet.

Rich, I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but I don't think this will catch on.

[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.

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by SouthGARef

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.

Please explain how.

[GPC2]

I am glad to have found this thread, yet I leave with no more an understanding than I came here with. This rule is obviously poorly written and leads to nothing but confusion.

On Friday, I had a kid somersault into the endzone on a breakaway run. We enforced the foul on the Try, but myself and the WH had some serious discussions as to what is the proper enforcement (and whether B had an option). I actually believe(d??) that the foul should be enforced on the Try with no option for B.

After the game I went to my rule book and case book and did the ol' merry go 'round and found out NOTHING. I decided to come here and post my question and obviously this one is totally unresolved here also.

Tonight I'll be bringing this play up at our meeting and hopefully I can bring the LA interpretation to the board tomorrow.

[GPC2]

OK, apparently our commissioner's interpretation is that live ball USC will NOT be able to be carried over to the kickoff.

For clarification I asked about three scenarios:

1) Player waves ball overhead at 5-yard line prior to scoring. RULING: USC, penalize 15 yards on Try.

2) Player somersaults into end zone. RULING: USC, penalize 15 yards on Try.

3) Player excessively celebrates after scoring TD. RULING: USC, offended team has option to enforce foul on Try or Kickoff.

[kdf5]

Your commissioner's ruling backs up the fact that these bridge rules were put in place to keep B from getting in some cheap shot and only paying a penalty of a yard and a half.