Extending the Period/Game

[Robert Goodman]

With the complete description, this becomes very clear. There was an encroachment foul during the dead ball interval. There was the appearance of a snap and scrimmage down, but that snap never officially occurred. The encroachment was penalized. However, team A was misled into believing that the ball had been live with a foul during that down that was penalized with the down to be repeated, and their coach therefore believed they had the right to an untimed down.

Still, there was something else that should have been done, unless the rules I'm referencing have been changed, which I doubt. (I have no hope of getting the article & section numbering right with so many intervening editions, but my bet is that their substance has not changed.) With team A preparing to spike the ball and seconds left in the game, team B's action delayed the game. It may not have been an intentional encroachment, but there would appear to be benefit to team B by discombobulating team A (making them come off the ball and await a new RFP) so as to let time run out, so I would rule delay of game by B, and with the penalty accepted for delay of game (superseding the encroachment penalty), time would resume on the succeeding snap rather than the RFP.

[MNBlue]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

With the complete description, this becomes very clear. There was an encroachment foul during the dead ball interval. There was the appearance of a snap and scrimmage down, but that snap never officially occurred. The encroachment was penalized. However, team A was misled into believing that the ball had been live with a foul during that down that was penalized with the down to be repeated, and their coach therefore believed they had the right to an untimed down.

Still, there was something else that should have been done, unless the rules I'm referencing have been changed, which I doubt. (I have no hope of getting the article & section numbering right with so many intervening editions, but my bet is that their substance has not changed.) With team A preparing to spike the ball and seconds left in the game, team B's action delayed the game. It may not have been an intentional encroachment, but there would appear to be benefit to team B by discombobulating team A (making them come off the ball and await a new RFP) so as to let time run out, so I would rule delay of game by B, and with the penalty accepted for delay of game (superseding the encroachment penalty), time would resume on the succeeding snap rather than the RFP.

It appears that you want to amend the rules to fit your position.

NFHS 3.6
When a team attempts to conserve or consume time illegally, the referee shall order the clock started or stop

I think it is a HUGE leap form the OP to your position of

delay of game by B

.

Isn't it possible that mistakes happened? B did encroached. 'A' coach made an assumption that was wrong.

I think it is much more likely that the officials got this correct and the 'A' coach was not happy because he didn't pay attention and was wrong.

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

However, team A was misled into believing that the ball had been live with a foul during that down that was penalized with the down to be repeated, and their coach therefore believed they had the right to an untimed down.

I don't think anyone was misled. That implies some sort of deception (intentional or not) on our part. Indeed, when I announced the foul, I gave the usual dead ball foul signal, and even said "Dead ball. Encroachment. 5 yards from the previous spot. Still first down."

I think the coach had in his mind the usual "Game cannot end on a defensive penalty" misconception. Now, I haven't been clear on this point, but I did discuss it with the A coach after the game. I told him that there was no foul on the last timed down of the period, so we do not extend the period with an untimed down. He argued it was a defensive penalty and I told him it didn't matter if it was offensive or defensive. Since this foul did not occur on the last _timed down_, there was no extension. He didn't agree, and he didn't persuade me otherwise. We left it at that.

Now, whether the coach thought he'd get an untimed down or not certainly wasn't our fault. We didn't tell him, or even hint to him that would be the case. As I pointed out, my wing told him "The clock will start at the ready" while A was at the sidelines. In fact, I think that hint "the clock will start..." would be significant.

[MD Longhorn]

I don't do FED, so correct me if I'm wrong... but wasn't the rule exactly what the coach was expecting until very recently. Seems to me I remember discussions exactly like this perhaps 3 years ago where the FED rule was EXACTLY like the coach seemed to think.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I don't do FED, so correct me if I'm wrong... but wasn't the rule exactly what the coach was expecting until very recently. Seems to me I remember discussions exactly like this perhaps 3 years ago where the FED rule was EXACTLY like the coach seemed to think.

Mike, it has been "last timed down" for many (i.e., more than 3) years. I don't have a book prior to 2009 here, but it wasn't a rule change in 2009.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Mike, it has been "last timed down" for many (i.e., more than 3) years. I don't have a book prior to 2009 here, but it wasn't a rule change in 2009.

Anyone know how many years? I've been on here a while. I just remember reading the old rule and thinking, "Wow... that's odd". Then again --- at that time you still allowed 2 forward passes too, as long as the first was behind the line.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Anyone know how many years? I've been on here a while. I just remember reading the old rule and thinking, "Wow... that's odd". Then again --- at that time you still allowed 2 forward passes too, as long as the first was behind the line.

What you may be thinking of is the Fed/NCAA difference where in Fed, even if the clock does not expire during the down, there will be an untimed down if there was a live ball foul during the last timed down. In NCAA we would not have the untimed down unless time actually expired during the down.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Welpe

What you may be thinking of is the Fed/NCAA difference where in Fed, even if the clock does not expire during the down, there will be an untimed down if there was a live ball foul during the last timed down. In NCAA we would not have the untimed down unless time actually expired during the down.

You are right... that's what I was vaguely remembering.