horse collar in EZ
 

NFHS

Team A is on their own 2 yard line. QB A1 scrambles in the end zone and is tackled by horse collar in the end zone by B1. How is the penalty enforced?

My first thought is the run ended in the end zone. The Penalty Enforcement Spot should be the end of the run. In this scenario the I am enforcing the penalty from the goal line with the ball ending up on A's 15 yardline

NF: 10-5-2, "The enforcement spot for any foul by the defense is the goal line when the run ends in the end zone and would result in a safety."

This can't be a safety!

It would have been if B had not fouled. ;)

Of course not... another example of the classic FED and NCAA run-on sentence. Throw in a comma - they really mean that if the play WOULD HAVE resulted in a safety (sans the penalty), the enforcement spot is the goal line.

Thank you...it is early but no that early.

The result of the play is a safety without a penalty. So you tell the team if they do not want a safety then accept the penalty. And based on the overall situation in the game that might not be something we should automatically assume.

Peace

Canadian Ruling
 

CANADIAN RULING:

UR before YG is PLS or PBD. The bullets are A's choice first.

• PLS: Team A 1D/10 @ A-17.
• PBD: Score the Safety Touch, then Team B's option:
  1. Team B 1D/10 @ B-20.
  2. Team A KO @ A-50.
  3. Team B KO @ B-20.

exactly.

Yeah, because a team would rather give the other guys 2 pts and the ball rather than replaying the down from the 15 (a 13yd gain with no down counted). Do you even think before you answer? Come up with some reasonable situation where any team would not take the penalty.

How many posts do you have?

Yes, game situation they might want to take the field position with the two points instead of taking the ball at the 15. Not likely, but very possible which is why you give them the option. I do recall a pro coach took the wind in OT instead of getting the ball. And they lost but the coach wanted the wind so bad and ended up losing. Not our job to think for coaches.

I think officials often assume teams want something only to find out the team wanted the not so obvious option. But hey, forgive me for having dealt with that personally as an official then talking about it only on a forum like some will do. ;)

Peace

I've never had to deal with it personally, but I've seen many a college team take a safety with the lead so they could kick the ball to the other end of the field and play field position. I don't see the difference here. It seems reasonable to me that in some cases taking the safety may be the best alternative. But that's just me :)

Good point JRut...his number of posts stands at 5! :)

Actually, the grammar is correct here, though elliptical. Let me fill it in:

The enforcement spot is the goal line when (two conditions are both met, namely: )
(a) the run ends in the end zone, and
(b) (the play) would result in a safety (if A declines the penalty).

Yeah, that's better. :rolleyes:

Make it a punter instead of a QB. A up by 6, 20 seconds to go, 4th down and 30 from the 2. Coach tells punter to catch the snap and step out of the endzone - would rather punt from the 20 without a rush, than punt from the edge of the endzone, risking a block. Punter flubs the snap, picks it up, and in a panic tries to step out of bounds instead of just falling to the ground. Punter is HCT'd in the EZ.

Take the safety and punt from the 20 instead of trying again to punt from the 15, with a rush (and actually punting from about the 3-4 yard line.

And the OPer did not say where the line to gain is either. We do not know if there is a first down if accepting the penalty. Also might make a difference to what a coach might decide.

Peace

I *frequently* enforce penalties without explaining all the options to the captains/coaches. This would be one of those times.

I had a funny situation where we had a flag from the LJ and I was over at the sideline getting the info -- I turned to the coach and said, "Declined, right?" (as doing so would yield a 4th and 8) and he was confused for a minute and said, "aren't you going to ask my captain" and I said, "Why, you and I are right here." He laughed. Anything complex or complicated or when I'm in the coach's lap goes through the coaches. I don't believe in letting a captain screw up penalty enforcement for us (or the coin toss, for that matter).

Getting back to the topic -- asking A whether they'd want the safety against them (to me) is a not-very-bright move by a white hat.

Exactly.

I've seen this coaching move before. And more than once too.

As with many things in football, "it depends on the other variables (situation)".

Hey newbie, there are situations where a team would prefer to take a safety.

Those should be obvious, no?

One time I saw a clip from a HS game where Team A was up by 2 points and the ball. They had to win by more than 2 points to make the playoffs. So on the lsat play of the game, the QB ran 50-60 yards behind him for the safety and they ended up winning in OT by a touchdown and went to the playoffs.

It should at least be obvious when there's a question, yes. I admit that most of the time, the safety is the obvious decision and the extent of my asking of the coach would be something like, "You want the safety, right, coach?"