You Make the Call...

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by BroKen62

Actually, it did make a difference. If you had thrown the flag for illegal substitution or illegal participation, since both of those are live ball fouls, A would have had the opportunity to run an untimed down. If you got them for nonplayers being on the field, that's treated as a dead ball unsportsmanlike, therefore no untimed down.
3.2. ART. 3 . . . A period must be extended by an untimed down if during the last timed down of the period, one of the following occured:
a. There was a foul by either team and the penalty is accepted, except for
those fouls listed in 3-3-4b.

ART. 4 . . . A period shall not be extended by an untimed down if during the
last timed down of the period, one of the following occurs:
a. When the defense fouls during a successful try/field goal and the offended
team accepts the results of the play with enforcement of the penalty from
the succeeding spot.
b. There was a foul by either team and the penalty is accepted for:
1. unsportsmanlike fouls,
2. non-player fouls,
3. fouls that specify a loss of down, or
4. fouls that are enforced on the subsequent kickoff as in Rule 8-2-2.
NOTE: The score is cancelled in the event of an accepted foul that specifies a loss of down.

Actually the illegal substitution foul we looked at was 3-7-6 "During a down, a replaced player or substitute who enters the field, but does not participate, constitutes illegal substitution." In the penalty section for this rule it indicates this is considered a non-player foul. We couldn't find an IP rule that fit since the players did not participate. So that left us with USC or IS non-player both of which fall under the rule you state above to NOT extend the period. What I would like to know is an official word on what rule applies when this happens.

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

Actually the illegal substitution foul we looked at was 3-7-6 "During a down, a replaced player or substitute who enters the field, but does not participate, constitutes illegal substitution." In the penalty section for this rule it indicates this is considered a non-player foul. We couldn't find an IP rule that fit since the players did not participate. So that left us with USC or IS non-player both of which fall under the rule you state above to NOT extend the period. What I would like to know is an official word on what rule applies when this happens.

You are absolutely correct. Please accept my apology.

The only option that would have extended the period would have been illegal participation.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by BroKen62

You are absolutely correct. Please accept my apology.

The only option that would have extended the period would have been illegal participation.

Would you consider this USC, IS, SLW, or nothing considering it was the last play of the game and enforcement would not extend the game? Assuming it's not the last play of the game, does that change your ruling?

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

Would you consider this USC, IS, SLW, or nothing considering it was the last play of the game and enforcement would not extend the game? Assuming it's not the last play of the game, does that change your ruling?

Honestly, if they just overreacted to the play and were on the field because of their emotions, I wouldn't throw a flag. With the ball and the runner headed toward the goal line beyond the team box area, I would be concentrating more on what was going on down there instead of looking over my shoulder worried about nonplayers on the field. JMO.

Also, whether it was last play or not, I hope my cal/non call would not be affected by clock status, but I really don't know. I would have to be there.
Since you guys did nothing, I'm going to defer to your judgment because you were there. More than likely you did the right thing.