Help me think through this one.

[ump33]

Once B20 fumbled and the ball came out of the end zone, the momentum exception is no longer in affect and B20 is responsible for "forcing" the ball across his own goal line (into his own end zone). The foul on B55 is enforced from the end of the run and the end of the run is in the end zone = Safety.

[maven]

Originally Posted by ump33

Once B20 fumbled and the ball came out of the end zone, the momentum exception is no longer in affect and B20 is responsible for "forcing" the ball across his own goal line (into his own end zone). The foul on B55 is enforced from the end of the run and the end of the run is in the end zone = Safety.

I agree with this. 8-5-2a, 10-3-3b

[WestCoaster]

Originally Posted by ump33

Once B20 fumbled and the ball came out of the end zone, the momentum exception is no longer in affect and B20 is responsible for "forcing" the ball across his own goal line (into his own end zone). The foul on B55 is enforced from the end of the run and the end of the run is in the end zone = Safety.

Yes, BUT...Once you fumble the ball out of the end zone following an interception in the end zone, it's no longer a touchback either. Yet Redding guide says the basic spot in that instance is the end of the run which brings it out to the 20, not the spot of the fumble in the end zone, resulting in a safety. This is why I ask. Has anyone actually read a case ruling on this exact scenario. I'm still not convinced it's a safety.

[ump33]

Originally Posted by WestCoaster

Yes, BUT...Once you fumble the ball out of the end zone following an interception in the end zone, it's no longer a touchback either. Yet Redding guide says the basic spot in that instance is the end of the run which brings it out to the 20, not the spot of the fumble in the end zone, resulting in a safety. This is why I ask. Has anyone actually read a case ruling on this exact scenario. I'm still not convinced it's a safety.

Two different plays ... Team A is responsible in this play since the ball was intercepted in the EZ. The EOR is in the EZ and as long as B maintains Team Possession, the Basic Spot is the 20 yd line.

10-4-6 . . . The basic spot is the 20-yard line for fouls by either team when the opponent of the team in possession at the time of the foul is responsible for forcing the ball across the goal line of the team in possession, and the related run ends in the end zone and is followed by a loose ball, regardless of where the loose ball becomes dead.

[WestCoaster]

Originally Posted by ump33

Once B20 fumbled and the ball came out of the end zone, the momentum exception is no longer in affect and B20 is responsible for "forcing" the ball across his own goal line (into his own end zone). The foul on B55 is enforced from the end of the run and the end of the run is in the end zone = Safety.

Also, you say that B is responsible for forcing the ball into his own end zone. This is not correct. The momentum exception implies that the forward pass was the force that put the ball into the end zone. Had he been tackled in the end zone and not fumbled, the ball would be B's at the 3 yard line, and the penalty enforced from there, not a safety.

[ump33]

Originally Posted by WestCoaster

Also, you say that B is responsible for forcing the ball into his own end zone. This is not correct. The momentum exception implies that the forward pass was the force that put the ball into the end zone. Had he been tackled in the end zone and not fumbled, the ball would be B's at the 3 yard line, and the penalty enforced from there, not a safety.

Respectfully disagree ... The pass is not the force that put the ball in the EZ. When B caught the pass on the 3 yd line, the pass ends and B's "run" begins. So yes, B is responsible for forcing/taking the ball into his own EZ. Now, as long as the ball becomes dead in B's EZ and B still has Team Position, the momentum exception allows the ball to be placed at the 3yd line (EOR).

The exception does not imply, it states:

EXCEPTION: When a defensive player intercepts an opponent’s forward pass; intercepts or recovers an opponent’s fumble or backward pass; or an R player catches or recovers a scrimmage kick or free kick between his 5-yard line and the goal line, and his original momentum carries him into the end zone where the ball is declared dead in his team’s possession or it goes out of bounds in the end zone, the ball belongs to the team in possession at the spot where the pass or fumble was intercepted or recovered or the kick was caught or recovered.

Intercepted, caught or recovered mean the player in question is in possession of a live ball and that makes him a runner who is responsible for where he goes.

[JugglingReferee]

In Canada, we deem possession to be gained in the EZ (due to momentum) and therefore B scrimmages 1D/10 @ B-20.

[WestCoaster]

Originally Posted by ump33

Respectfully disagree ... The pass is not the force that put the ball in the EZ. When B caught the pass on the 3 yd line, the pass ends and B's "run" begins. So yes, B is responsible for forcing/taking the ball into his own EZ. Now, as long as the ball becomes dead in B's EZ and B still has Team Position, the momentum exception allows the ball to be placed at the 3yd line (EOR).

The exception does not imply, it states:

EXCEPTION: When a defensive player intercepts an opponent’s forward pass; intercepts or recovers an opponent’s fumble or backward pass; or an R player catches or recovers a scrimmage kick or free kick between his 5-yard line and the goal line, and his original momentum carries him into the end zone where the ball is declared dead in his team’s possession or it goes out of bounds in the end zone, the ball belongs to the team in possession at the spot where the pass or fumble was intercepted or recovered or the kick was caught or recovered.

Intercepted, caught or recovered mean the player in question is in possession of a live ball and that makes him a runner who is responsible for where he goes.

I respectfully disagree with you. The pass in this instance IS the force responsible for putting the ball into the end zone. Otherwise, if as you suggest, B supplied the force which put the ball into the end zone, downing it there would be a safety by rule. There are certain things that can put the ball into the end zone without being considered a new force. Among them are muffed punts/kickoffs, batted backward passes before they are grounded, and any play where momentum carries you into the end zone. In each of these examples, the force is supplied by the kick or pass. Of this I am 100% sure.

[ump33]

Originally Posted by WestCoaster

I respectfully disagree with you. The pass in this instance IS the force responsible for putting the ball into the end zone. Otherwise, if as you suggest, B supplied the force which put the ball into the end zone, downing it there would be a safety by rule.

Hince the entire reason for the Momentun Exception.

8-5-2 . . . It is a safety when:
a. A runner carries the ball from the field of play to or across his own goal line, and it becomes dead there in his team’s possession.
EXCEPTION: When a defensive player intercepts an opponent’s forward pass; intercepts or recovers an opponent’s fumble or backward pass; or an R player catches or recovers a scrimmage kick or free kick between his 5-yard line and the goal line, and his original momentum carries him into the end zone where the ball is declared dead in his team’s possession or it goes out of bounds in the end zone, the ball belongs to the team in possession at the spot where the pass or fumble was intercepted or recovered or the kick was caught or recovered.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by WestCoaster

I respectfully disagree with you. The pass in this instance IS the force responsible for putting the ball into the end zone. Otherwise, if as you suggest, B supplied the force which put the ball into the end zone, downing it there would be a safety by rule.

That is exactly right. You have it now. If there was no momentum exception in the rulebook, then this play would result in a safety (in fact, before this rule, DB's making this play knew they had to get it back out of the EZ!).

You've illustrated the entire reason for the existence of the momentum exception. Now add in that due to the fumble in the OP, the momentum exception does not apply, and you're back to this basic play above (pre-exception if you will)... which is, as you're being told, and as you agree with now, a safety.

[maven]

Originally Posted by WestCoaster

Yet Redding guide says the basic spot in that instance is the end of the run which brings it out to the 20, not the spot of the fumble in the end zone, resulting in a safety.

Your inference is incorrect: the run ended in the EZ, when the runner fumbled. Since, as you point out, the result of the play was not a TB, the basic spot remains the end of the run, not the B20. A TB would be one way to get the basic spot out of the EZ.

Another would be momentum. But the ball did not become dead in the EZ, so momentum (and its special provision for the basic spot) does not apply.

Ump33 is correct: the penalty should be enforced from the end of the run, which was in the EZ. By rule, that penalty results in a safety, score 2 points for A, B will free kick from the B20.

Originally Posted by WestCoaster

The momentum exception implies that the forward pass was the force that put the ball into the end zone.

The momentum exception does not change the force that puts the ball in the EZ. It changes the consequences of that force: instead of ruling a safety, we're bringing the ball back out to the spot of recovery/catch when the momentum exception applies.