Since this is new for you guys in NF, I thought I would bring this play up to see how you would rule in NF. I'm not too certain on how NF rules are worded for this but it is my understanding that it is not the same as NCAA. I'll put K and R in since that is what you are used to.

4th and 10 on K-30. In a scrimmage kick formation K snaps the ball back to the punter. The punter is under a heavy rush and is forced to scramble. While he is scrambling R clips a K player on the 50. Finally the punter finds an opening and punts the ball deep to the R-30 where R20 calls a fair catch and the ball is dead at that spot. Ruling.

[Edited by JasonTX on Jun 27th, 2003 at 11:43 AM]

I'll take a stab at it...foul occured prior to change of possession. I'd guess the line of enforcement should be K's 30. I'll go with first and 10 for K on K's 45.

REPLY: I think Sloth is right for Fed. I also haven't seen the rule book yet, but I understand that the Fed is still confused about whether fouls during the interval between the snap and the kick might be subject to PSK. We know in NCAA rules, they are. But then again, NCAA defines a "scrimmage kick play" which they use to determine when PSK might apply. Federation has no such definition. They're all screwed up on this change.

In this month's Referee, they have case plays for Federation enforcement on PSK and one of their plays deals with 'before the kick crosses the ENZ' and after it does. They make a point of stating that the PSK is NOT in effect for fouls that happen before the ball crosses the ENZ and that this is a major difference from the NCAA rule. My guess is that it will be changed either before Sep. 1 or next year.

I would suspect that there could be times where the official seeing the foul may not know where the ball was. I guess as soon as you see the foul, take your eye off the action and find the ball to determine if it has crossed the neutral zone.

I've yet to get this year's rulebooks, but from my understanding that is exactly right. Whether we enforce as PSK or not depends on whether the ball has crossed the ENZ.

I did not realize however, that this was different from NCAA rules. It almost defeats the purpose of changing the rule to be more consistent if it still ISN'T consistent with other levels it seems.

Not only fouls that happen before the ball crosses the ENZ but fouls that happen inside the ENZ are not covered by the PSK. There is a Case Book play where the LOS is K's 40 and R commits a hold at K's 42. By rule, that is not a PSK foul.

The principle of "clean hands" still applies with the PSK. The difference (NFHS does not like the word exception)on a PSK R must have clean hands when the ball exits the expanded neutral zone.

In answer to the question, my answer is a loose ball play since PSK rules are not in effect at the time of the foul. Take the ball back to the previous spot, K's 30, fifteen yards to K's 45, 1st and ten for K.

Think coach R will buy it? "Didn't they change that rule this year?"

[Edited by Ed Hickland on Jun 29th, 2003 at 07:58 PM]

REPLY: Ed, this part <u>is</u> consistent with the NCAA rule, where B's foul must occur more than three yards beyond the NZ in order for PSK enforcement to apply. And in the NCAA book, three yards is also the limit of their ENZ (even though they don't call it that).

REPLY: Jason, this was the first problem I saw with the Fed's PSK rule. How does a guy 30 yards or more downfield who sees a B hold determine whether or not the kick had crossed the expanded neutral zone?? I asked an NFL friend of mine his opinion. He said that you should just use common sense. If the ball has come off the foot, then you rule that it has crossed the ENZ.

After reviewing 10-4-3, it looks like the ball must cross the ENZ. The foul can occur anytime during the down. It does not say that the foul has to occur before the ball crosses the ENZ.

Remember, certain publications are not always correct the first time around.

REPLY: I hope you're right STEVED21. That would make it a lot easier--and consistent with the NCAA rule. We've yet to get our rule and case books here in NJ, so I'm flying half-blind, but here is the wording from the NFHS website for the PSK change:
<b>NF 2-16-2g:</b> <i>The enforcement procedure for a foul by the receiving team <b>during a scrimmage kick</b> has been changed. The change reflects that should a foul occur by the receiving team on its side of the expanded neutral zone prior to the end of the kick, the receiving team shall retain possession of the ball following enforcement of the penalty. The foul does not apply to a try.</i> Note that here it comments on fouls occurring <i>...during the kick.</i> Also, the last sentence is awkward...probably should read, <i>"PSK enforcement does not apply to a try,"</i> and should probably also include <i>...or unsuccessful FG attempts during OT periods."</i> And that thought is also incomplete--at least here in Rule 2. What exactly do you do with an R foul that occurs during a try or unsuccessful FG attempt in OT? Is that covered elsewhere? In NCAA rules, such a foul reverts to previous spot enforcement. Do the new NF rules clarify that?? As you said, probably a lot of editorial revision still required.

Bob,

The rule book now reads:

During a scrimmage kick PLAY.

This makes it easier to enforce.

If you rule PSK after the ball has exited the foot then any foul by R on a scrimmage kick by definition falls under the rule. What everyone questioned were those fouls when the ball is definitely in the air or even on the ground rolling around before R gains possession; therefore, I think that is an excellent way to rule.

As for crossing the ENZ, R can foul before the ball crosses the ENZ or R can foul in or behind the ENZ. Both those cases would not be PSK fouls. Only fouls by R AFTER the ball has crossed the 3 yards past the LOS and until the kick ends fall under PSK rules. If R fouls after player possession, that is a post-possession foul.

If you carefully read 10-4-3 it only talks about movement of the basic spot. Go to 2-16-2g where it defines the type of foul for a definition of a post-scrimmage kick.

Bob M., you think of everything -- an unsuccessful FG during OT!

5-1-2 under Resolving Tied Games states:

When the defensive team gains possession of the ball, the down and the series immediately end for the offensive team.

My personal interpretation is if a PSK foul occurs, B will still gain possession of the ball on an unsuccessful field goal attempt.

Rule 8-3-5 covers trys:


...If during a successful try, a foul by B occurs, A is given the choice of:

a. Accepting the penalty and replaying the down following enforcement; or,
b. Accepting the result of the play and enforcement of the penalty from the succeeding spot.



[Edited by Ed Hickland on Jul 7th, 2003 at 12:13 PM]

Ed,

I hate to disagree, but, 10-4-3 says PSK applies when a foul occurs:
a During scrimmage kick plays, other than try
b During SKP in which the ball crosses the ENZ
c Beyond the ENZ
d Before the end of the kick
e K does not have possesion at the end of the down.

Nowhere does it say the foul must occur after the kick occurs or crosses the ENZ. Except:

There is conflict between 10-4-3 and 2-16-2g.

10-4-3 uses the term scrimage kick PLAy, while 2-16-2g just says during a scrimmage kick.



[Edited by STEVED21 on Jul 7th, 2003 at 12:13 PM]

The problem here is that the NF does not define a "scrimmage kick play". The NCAA defines it as the interval between the snap and the end of the kick. If the NF would adopt that definition, we would not have a problem of when the foul occur. The other problem is the Comments on the rule change on page 73 of the rule book which states that R must have "clean hands" until the ball crosses the ENZ.

REPLY: What I believe the intention is even if it doesn't come across well in the rules is this: If a foul that otherwise qualifies as a PSK enforceable foul occurs during a kick try anytime or during an unsuccessful FG in an extra period, PSK is not an option, but that does <u><b>not</b></u> mean that the foul is declined by rule and unenforceable. I believe that enforcement reverts back to the previous spot. I know that's the way it's designed in the NCAA rules, and I believe it's the most equitable enforcement. I hope the Fed clears this up. Can someone look in the case book to see if such a play is covered.

Heck Bob, it does not even come over so clear in the NCAA rules. I am with you that it should revert to a prev spot enforcement but there are some who still insist it should be "declined by rule", based on past statements by clinicians.

Mike, I can't see how anyone can endorse just "ignoring" the foul by B during a try or FG in extra periods. To my way of thinking, post scrimmage kick enforcement is listed as an "exception" to the enforcement rule for fouls during kick plays. If a foul fails to meet <u>any</u> of the criteria for PSK enforcement, then the exception is not applicable and you revert to the governing rule (NCAA 10-2-2e) which says the basic spot is the previous spot. What would they do if B fouled at the LOS? Ignore the foul?? No--they would enforce from the previous spot. And why? Because PSK isn't applicable for such fouls and you apply 10-2-2e. Same story for a foul during try. It's just failure to meet another criteria under which you're allowed to apply the PSK exception.

According to the NFHS, "this change does not create an exception to the penalty code, but rather, a new enforcement spot."

Therfore, I think if a foul is to be enforce from the PSK spot in an overtime period, the foul would not be penalized.

If you think about it, to be PSK the foul must occur beyond the ENZ. In a game winning FG situation how much activity happens that far down field?

It depends if you have a Leon Lett on your team or not.

He'd have to be REAL fast. In Fed we start on the 10 not the 25 like you guys!

REPLY: STEVED21, my comments were being made specifically in the context of NCAA rules and a response to the post by TxMike. In NCAA rules, PSK <u><b>is</b></u> listed as an "exception" to the standard enforcement procedures for fouls during kick plays which typically dictate previous spot enforcement--just like the Federation. I haven't yet received my NFHS books so I was unaware of their comment about PSK <u>not</u> being an exception. Interesting that unless the Federation changed 10-3-1a and 10-4-2b, PSK becomes a <i>de facto</i> exception regardless of what they choose to call it.

As far as your other comment about fouls by R during a kick try or during an unsuccessful FG attempt in OT being "ignored" or "declined by rule" please consider this: In order to apply PSK enforcement to a Team R foul, the foul must occur prior to the end of the kick and the following criteria must be met. Humor me since I don't have my Federation books yet.
1. Foul occurs beyond the expanded neutral zone
2. Kick must cross the NZ
3. Team K does not have possession at the end of the down
4. Must not be during a try or FG in OT

If a team R foul before the kick ends fails to meet either of the first three criteria, we penalize from the previous spot, correct? Why, when it fails to meet criteria #4, would we just choose to ignore it? What makes that criteria so special?

Also, STEVED21, Federation gives the states leeway in determining how to resolve ties--including the right to use a different OT procedure than the one listed in the Fed Rule Book. For example, here in NJ, we use the NCAA procedure (1/10 from B's 25) where B possession does <u>not</u> kill the play. B can score and win the game on a turnover. And I know that NJ is not the only ones using the NCAA procedure. So here the prospect of a long FG and a foul downfield by R is not so remote as it might be under the standard Federation OT.

Bob,

A. I do have the rule books and the quote was directly from NFHS comment on revisions in the 2003 case book. The rules do create a NEW basic spot for PSK in
10-4-3. The "exception" is now that a PSK foul is an exception to a loose ball play. It's semantics but it helps make the point that the foul wouldn't be enforced.

B. See one of my previous posts where I list the 5 criteria for PSK from 10-4-3. These are the "special" criteria.

C. The 10 yd thing was a joke. We use 20yds in NY.

D. Are you really going to give K another oppotunity for FG or a 1st down if they miss a long kick and R commits a foul after the kick was grounded?

REPLY: Consider this play in OT at least for those of us who use the NCAA procedure. Team A attempts a long FG. It's coming down short at R's 5, and R12 sees a chance to grab it and head for a winning score. However, he muffs it (still a kick) and it rolls toward R's goal line. K21, covering the kick, sees an opportunity to recover and extend his series first and goal inside R's 5. R12 tackles him to prevent his recovery and the ball rolls into R's end zone. Do we just say, "Tough luck K. It's now R's ball"

I understand your point about semantics and the fact that the Fed does refer to PSK as an "exception" to standard loose ball foul enforcement. But the exception is only in force if the PSK criteria are met. What if they're not? Do we just ignore any fouls by R that don't qualify for PSK, e.g. a face mask by R at the LOS?

I see it as either PSK enforcement (if all criteria are met) or previous spot enforcement (if any of the PSK criteria are not met). In this case, one criteria is not met, i.e. it's during a FG in OT. Therefore, enforce from the previous spot.

I guess you are quoting NCAA rules because FED does not have this criteria.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by STEVED21

Quote:

I guess you are quoting NCAA rules because FED does not have this criteria.

REPLY: Actually, you're right--I was quoting the NCAA rules. The NCAA just put the OT FG exclusion in this season. They missed it originally. Eventually--it will just take time--the Federation will realize that PSK doesn't make sense in traditional OT.