Yes there is. Common sense tells you that after a play is over or during any dead ball situation you wouldn't have "incidental" fouls. It would have to rise to the level of a personal foul or you have nothing.

NCAA thought too many ticky-tack personal fouls were being called. A player who had a hand around a face mask then had no incentive to let go, resulting in greater danger. So the 5 yard non-PF penalty was added. Fed and NFL eventually followed suit.

This stuff goes in cycles. At the beginning of the 20th Century, a roughing the kicker foul was put in. Then after a number of years, running into the kicker was added. Eventually the latter was taken out. Then it was put back in. I've forgotten its current status in NCAA -- are there still a 5 and 15yarder for that, or did they eliminate the non-PF foul again?

NCAA still has running into the kicker/roughing the kicker. It's been that way for as long as I can remember.

The problm with the 5 yard face mask is that too many officials call it when the 15 yarder should be called. Saw a bowl game a couple of years ago where the runner almost got his head tore off. HL called a 5 yarder. I'm glad they got rid of it. Hopefully, the NFHS will too.

Exactly my point. If the grab of the mask moves the head *at all*, it's 15. I'd be thrilled to go back to only having a 15 with the direction to ignore a simple grasp and release of the mask.

I guess what I really want to know is...if you have a two yard gain on first down and then tack on a five yard face-mask penalty, why is it still first down? If the offense gets credit for the two yard gain, shouldn't it be second down? I've been told you have to "replay the down", but you're not replaying the down if they've gotten the credit for the two yards. Several people have told me this is true, but I have yet to get a rule / reference for it.

5-2-2. Replay the down.

That's what I was looking for....thanks.

http://users.bestweb.net/~robgood/football/downzero.txt
 

This has been true for a loooong time (and you know how long my time perspective is), so I feel confident in citing Fed 5-2-2 no matter how old the rule book. They inherited that from NCAA, which got it from pre-NCAA days. The only question on enforcement philosophy of any penalties against the defense since the series of downs was invented has been whether the down should remain the same number or a new series be granted. The logic is that if the defense stops the offense's advance by illegal means, the offense would still have been advancing the ball during that down otherwise, so they should get that distance, plus whatever the penalty's distance is, and keep the down -- unless you want to give them a new series, which the rules makers from time to time decide certain penalties should incur. The logic for penalties on the offense is basically the same -- that despite their own illegal play, they were still advancing the ball at or in association with the spot indicated.

The anomalies in the logic are fouls following change of possession or achievement of the line-to-gain during a down. Because it was decided a long time ago that the new series was conceptually awarded only after the ball became dead, rather than instantly during the down, there is no "down 0", so that keeping the down the same as it would have been actually rips an opportunity off of the offense. See link for discussion.