The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Football (https://forum.officiating.com/football/)
-   -   NFHS: Where do we put the ball? (https://forum.officiating.com/football/55371-nfhs-where-do-we-put-ball.html)

CWIG Thu Nov 12, 2009 07:11pm

I believe Merlin has a vaild point. There would almost certainly have to be ineligibles downfield at that point. If so, and since poessession never changed (no 'clean hands' to think about), the foul would be enforced from the previous spot. Replay of 4th down.

Bullycon Thu Nov 12, 2009 08:33pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by CWIG (Post 635882)
I believe Merlin has a vaild point. There would almost certainly have to be ineligibles downfield at that point. If so, and since poessession never changed (no 'clean hands' to think about), the foul would be enforced from the previous spot. Replay of 4th down.

A new series is still awarded to K because they are in possession at the end of a down in which R was the first to touch a scrimmage kick beyond the expanded neutral zone. (5-1-3f, 5-2-2, 5-2-5f)

It will be 1st and 10 for K from K's 35 following penalty enforcement.

Robert Goodman Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:20pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by merlin (Post 635878)
I would think that there would have to be illegal men downfield in this scenario as well.

We don't even know that the pass went beyond the neutral zone.

merlin Fri Nov 13, 2009 01:13am

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbyron (Post 635881)
Illegal men? What, no visas? :D

Yeah, that was funny! I think my mind was fried when I wrote that. Long day at work and this play to think about was too much.
I should have said ineligibles downfield.

MI Official Fri Nov 13, 2009 10:29am

hmmm....
 
hmmmm. I can't find anything that says recovery AFTER touching by K behind the neutral zone in my case book. but if I use the logic of 'not advancing a muff' why would we not have K ball 1 and 10 at the spot of recovery since a legal kick has occured? The only snag I see in explaining is the pass was incomplete. had it been complet or he ran, would we not by in the right to rule the play was essentially over when K secured possession? just my opinion....:confused:

bossman72 Fri Nov 13, 2009 01:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MI Official (Post 635971)
but if I use the logic of 'not advancing a muff' why would we not have K ball 1 and 10 at the spot of recovery since a legal kick has occured?

There is no rule that says "you cannot advance a muff." The rule is you cannot advance a kick beyond the neutral zone.

However, BEHIND the NZ, anyone can advance the ball. 6-2-3

whitehat Fri Nov 13, 2009 01:29pm

I'm givng DJ_NV the trophy for coming up with what may just be the most mysterious play situation ever...anybody want to email a NF interpretor for a final ruling?

Just when I thought after 25 years of officiating and rules study I had it all figured out...(or much of it anyway between bouts of random forgetfullness and brain locks...) :D

DJ_NV Fri Nov 13, 2009 05:43pm

I'll certainly pass on the credit...this was the brainchild of one of our fellow members in my association. He was going to email it to the Fed as well. I will post here if he receives a response.

Thanks again to all for sparing a bit of their time and brainpower. I was hoping that someone might have been able to produce a casebook situation that I missed, but I just don't think it's there.

bisonlj Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:19pm

I've seen this play discussed several times on various boards (including this one I think) and we've discussed it at association meetings. I doubt it would ever happen though. I'm pretty sure the result of every discussion was 1st and 10 for A at the previous spot. The team in possession at the end of the down gets a new series since the ball was touched by R beyond the neutral zone. Even though it was an incomplete pass, K was in possession at the end of the down. On an incomplete legal forward pass, the next down is from the previous line of scrimmage. Assuming no ineligible receivers were downfield, A's ball 1st and 10 at the K40.

If you did have ineligible receivers down field, it would be 4th and 15 at the K35. R would take that penalty.

Welpe Sat Nov 14, 2009 04:22am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bisonlj (Post 636178)

If you did have ineligible receivers down field, it would be 4th and 15 at the K35. R would take that penalty.

I disagree. Once R touches the scrimmage kick beyond the expanded neutral zone, the continuity of downs has been broken and whomever is in possession at the end of the down will be awarded a new series. The ineligible downfield penalty will be enforced from the previous spot however it will be 1st and 10 for K.


Rule 5-1-3f

ART. 3 . . . When a scrimmage down ends with the ball in the field of play or
out of bounds between the goal lines, a new series is awarded to:

f. The team in possession at the end of the down, if R is the first to touch a
scrimmage kick while it is beyond the expanded neutral zone, unless the
penalty is accepted for a non post-scrimmage kick foul which occurred
before the kick ended.

Robert Goodman Sat Nov 14, 2009 12:51pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welpe (Post 636201)
Rule 5-1-3f

ART. 3 . . . When a scrimmage down ends with the ball in the field of play or
out of bounds between the goal lines, a new series is awarded to:

f. The team in possession at the end of the down, if R is the first to touch a
scrimmage kick while it is beyond the expanded neutral zone, unless the
penalty is accepted for a non post-scrimmage kick foul which occurred
before the kick ended.

They should specify the scrimmage kick as the last kick during that down. Otherwise if instead of throwing a forward pass, A's punter had punted the ball again, and a player of A/K recovered the ball beyond the expanded neutral zone (a violation but not a foul IIRC), team A would get the ball at that spot, because R was first to touch a scrimmage kick, etc.

Bullycon Sun Nov 15, 2009 07:42pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman (Post 636217)
They should specify the scrimmage kick as the last kick during that down. Otherwise if instead of throwing a forward pass, A's punter had punted the ball again, and a player of A/K recovered the ball beyond the expanded neutral zone (a violation but not a foul IIRC), team A would get the ball at that spot, because R was first to touch a scrimmage kick, etc.

Probably a good idea, but I don't know if it's necessary.

In your scenario, we have a spot of first touching on the second kick. R may take the ball at that spot.

Robert Goodman Sun Nov 15, 2009 11:14pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullycon (Post 636348)
Probably a good idea, but I don't know if it's necessary.

In your scenario, we have a spot of first touching on the second kick. R may take the ball at that spot.

Aw, too bad, I was hoping we could complicate this one even more. ;)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:01pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1