You Make the Call...

[jaybird]

Originally Posted by BroKen62

I agree with you except for the penalty enforcement - B declines A's inelible downfield and takes the ball at the previous spot, the17. Next, because we have 2 USC's, I would enforce B's foul first because it occurred first - half the distance to the 8.5, then enforce A's dead ball USC 15 yards to the 23.5. B's Ball 1st and 10 at the 23.5.

Where was a USC on A?

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by jaybird

Where was a USC on A?

In the Original post:
During the discussion...an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty was given to the kicking team as well.

I'm assuming A and K are the same here?

[hsfootballfan]

Thanks for the input. Seems that there really is no consensus.

I wanted to throw in some comments from our Section commissioner and another respected official in the area:

Here are some quote from NS CIF Commiss Liz Kyle:

"You cannot appeal a judgment call. A rule interpretation is appealable, but you have to do it during the game," she said. "I have talked with the Paradise administration. I told them I'd look into it. I'm still in the process."

Here is some for facts from Lloyd Menefee of Corning for the Redding unit of the California Football Officials Association.

"Illegal substitution CAN be a dead-ball foul, Menefee said, and if it was in that situation, it would have been Paradise's ball because of an incomplete pass after the blocked field goal on fourth down. A dead-ball penalty wasn't the appropriate call in that case, though, Menefee said.

"In this case the illegal substitution would have been a live-ball foul because it occurred during a live ball," he said. "The only time you get a dead-ball substitution foul is if there's 12 players in the huddle and one forgets to go out, or if someone doesn't get off the field before the ball is snapped."

More fuel for the fire.

Thanks everyone!

[jaybird]

Originally Posted by hsfootballfan

Thanks for the input. Seems that there really is no consensus.

I wanted to throw in some comments from our Section commissioner and another respected official in the area:

Here are some quote from NS CIF Commiss Liz Kyle:

"You cannot appeal a judgment call. A rule interpretation is appealable, but you have to do it during the game," she said. "I have talked with the Paradise administration. I told them I'd look into it. I'm still in the process."

Here is some for facts from Lloyd Menefee of Corning for the Redding unit of the California Football Officials Association.

"Illegal substitution CAN be a dead-ball foul, Menefee said, and if it was in that situation, it would have been Paradise's ball because of an incomplete pass after the blocked field goal on fourth down. A dead-ball penalty wasn't the appropriate call in that case, though, Menefee said.

"In this case the illegal substitution would have been a live-ball foul because it occurred during a live ball," he said. "The only time you get a dead-ball substitution foul is if there's 12 players in the huddle and one forgets to go out, or if someone doesn't get off the field before the ball is snapped."

More fuel for the fire.

Thanks everyone!

Therefore, since there was not a substitution nor any participation, there can't be an illegal substitution or an illegal participation foul, which takes us back to having non-players out of the box and on the field which is unsportsmanlike conduct.

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by jaybird

therefore, since there was not a substitution nor any participation, there can't be an illegal substitution or an illegal participation foul, which takes us back to having non-players out of the box and on the field which is unsportsmanlike conduct.

exactly.

[AFHusker]

Originally Posted by jaybird

Therefore, since there was not a substitution nor any participation, there can't be an illegal substitution or an illegal participation foul, which takes us back to having non-players out of the box and on the field which is unsportsmanlike conduct.

3-7-6 states "During a down, a replaced player or substitute who enters the field, but does not participate, constitutes illegal substitution." I believe that is was was called. If so, as stated by Mr. Menefee, it is a live ball foul in this case.

[AFHusker]

If they had ineligible down field (on A), illegal sub (on B), and a USC (on A) why are they snapping the ball from the 27?

[bossman72]

Originally Posted by jaybird

Therefore, since there was not a substitution nor any participation, there can't be an illegal substitution or an illegal participation foul, which takes us back to having non-players out of the box and on the field which is unsportsmanlike conduct.

This is not a USC for having players outside the box. This is clearly a 3-7-6 situation.

"ART. 6 . . . During a down, a replaced player or substitute who enters the field, but does not participate, constitutes illegal substitution."

Let's use #50 here. He entered the field after the snap, realized he shouldn't be there, and left without participating. I think that's 3-7-6 to a T.

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by bossman72

This is not a USC for having players outside the box. This is clearly a 3-7-6 situation.

"ART. 6 . . . During a down, a replaced player or substitute who enters the field, but does not participate, constitutes illegal substitution."

Let's use #50 here. He entered the field after the snap, realized he shouldn't be there, and left without participating. I think that's 3-7-6 to a T.

Do you think #50 entered the field with the intent to substitute? Or Celebrate? That's the question. If he went onto the field to replace a player, then yes, invoke 3.7.6. BUT, if he was on the field for no other reason than to celebrate what he thought was a game-ending play, then you have to invoke 9.8.1 -
"ART. 1 . . . No coach, substitute, trainer or other team attendant shall act in an unsportsmanlike manner once the officials assume authority for the contest. Examples are, but not limited to: i. Being on the field except as a substitute or replaced player."

In my opinion, neither #50 or any other B player went onto the field to take the place of a player who was already in the game, therefore, the only explanation is that they were nonplayers who were on the field and not substitutes or replaced players.

[jaybird]

Originally Posted by BroKen62

In the Original post:
During the discussion...an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty was given to the kicking team as well.

I'm assuming A and K are the same here?

I forgot about that. Thanks.