Illegal substitution to ice the kicker

[HLin NC]

Would be the same result under NFHS. The philosophy is to kill it if noticed as a dead ball foul to prevent it turning into Illegal participation with a 15 yard penalty.

You could change it but all B/R has to do is jump offside as Robt. said so there is more than one way to skin a cat.

You can't legislate every conceivable potential inequity out of the game. Cincinnati just out coached Cutcliffe there.

[voiceoflg]

Thanks for the information. And I can't believe my brain flatulence. Of course there are other ways to get the penalty. You can tell I'm in off-season form.

Thanks again.

[jchamp]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

Would be the same result under NFHS. The philosophy is to kill it if noticed as a dead ball foul to prevent it turning into Illegal participation with a 15 yard penalty.

You could change it but all B/R has to do is jump offside as Robt. said so there is more than one way to skin a cat.

You can't legislate every conceivable potential inequity out of the game. Cincinnati just out coached Cutcliffe there.

I missed the game, so I don't know if there was other conversation to indicate it was intentional. I think we've all seen plenty of special teams plays with confusion regarding who is supposed to be on the field that, without further knowledge, it is plausible that there was legitimate confusion.

I "took" a point off the board in a game this year by waiting until VERY late to verify my 12-man B count on a try. On the subsequent play after enforcement, the kick was blocked. In hindsight, I think in the future if it took that long, I would allow a snap to occur since the penalty is the same (half the distance) in either case in my old situation. The reason I mention that is because if it is almost simultaneous with the snap, I would probably now tend to allow the play to occur and give A the 15 yards + re-try opportunity. I would do THAT, because as you mentioned, there is a much less unsporting way to ice the kicker.

And, as provided for in the rules, if they continue to ice the kicker as such, WH can consider it an unsporting act and take necessary action, including the award of a score.

[HLin NC]

The FG attempt was just before halftime. Even with the 5 yd penalty, Duke missed the second attempt. Cutcliffe was interviewed as the teams left the field and he said it was an unsporting way to ice the kicker. That got the discussion started.

Probably true but under our new Schiano Method of "all's fair in love and war", smart move by Cincy.

[maven]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

The FG attempt was just before halftime. Even with the 5 yd penalty, Duke missed the second attempt. Cutcliffe was interviewed as the teams left the field and he said it was an unsporting way to ice the kicker. That got the discussion started.

Probably true but under our new Schiano Method of "all's fair in love and war", smart move by Cincy.

The only remedy I can think of would be the nuclear option of treating this as an unfair act and penalizing the offending team 15 rather than 5 (or, the global thermonuclear option of awarding a score). If one crew did that, coaches might not think it's such a clever tactic.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by maven

The only remedy I can think of would be the nuclear option of treating this as an unfair act and penalizing the offending team 15 rather than 5 (or, the global thermonuclear option of awarding a score).

But to be consistent you'd have to do the same with the other ways B could intentionally foul to prevent play.

It is an unfair act when A is trying to get off a quick play and B does something illegal to prevent it, especially if it looked like the quick play would've gone for a TD (such as if team A had a huge numbers advantage at the point of attack, or an uncovered receiver). I presented such a scenario decades ago to the sec'y of NCAA's rules committee and he thought it'd be good only for USC, not equitable penalty.

[JasonTX]

I would have rather them let this be a live ball illegal participation. I suspect the snap could have taken place during a recount of the players. In NCAA both Illegal Substitution and Illegal Participation are 5 yard penalties.

[Scooby]

Would we be having this discussion if Duke would have missed the first field goal and made the second? Cincinnati gave Duke an opportunity to try the field goal 5 yards closer. Duke missed.

And if you believe that the rule should be changed in this situation do you believe that if a defender is beat by a wideout and tackles him while the ball is in the air, saving a touchdown, should there be a greater penalty? the defense is benefiting from a foul. In high school it is only a 15 yard penalty and a 1st down.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by jchamp

I "took" a point off the board in a game this year by waiting until VERY late to verify my 12-man B count on a try. On the subsequent play after enforcement, the kick was blocked. In hindsight, I think in the future if it took that long, I would allow a snap to occur since the penalty is the same (half the distance) in either case in my old situation.

Actually no, it's not. K could take the point and have the 15 yards assessed on the subsequent kickoff.