The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 10, 2010, 01:52pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmc View Post
Although the original question wasn't specifically about a facemask foul, and in practice a 5 yard facemask foul would most normally apply to a live ball situation, there is absolutely nothing that restricts such a foul to live ball only.
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.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 10, 2010, 04:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,876
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdf5 View Post
I think the 5 yarder was added years ago to prevent the 15 yarders.
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?
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 10, 2010, 04:50pm
APG APG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 10, 2010, 06:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
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.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 10, 2010, 07:06pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by BktBallRef View Post
The problm with the 5 yard face mask is that too many officials call it when the 15 yarder should be called.
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.
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 10, 2010, 08:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Ste. Genevieve, MO
Posts: 68
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.
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 10, 2010, 08:37pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by stegenref View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 10, 2010, 08:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Ste. Genevieve, MO
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN View Post
5-2-2. Replay the down.
That's what I was looking for....thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 11, 2010, 10:56am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,876
http://users.bestweb.net/~robgood/football/downzero.txt

Quote:
Originally Posted by stegenref View Post
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.
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.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Penalty Enforcement nelson_28602 Football 3 Sun Nov 11, 2007 03:34pm
Penalty enforcement... Mike51 Football 2 Wed Nov 07, 2007 03:12pm
Penalty Enforcement bossman72 Football 14 Tue Oct 16, 2007 09:44am
ND VS BC PENALTY ENFORCEMENT Kelvin green Football 3 Sun Oct 26, 2003 09:38am
Penalty Enforcement Ed Maeder Football 2 Sun Sep 14, 2003 08:50pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:14pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1