The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 05, 2013, 05:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 762
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
Does "distance penalties" mean the distance portion of a penalty enforcement, as I think they meant? Then the illegal forward pass from the end zone would still result in a safety, because 0 distance from the spot still leaves the spot behind their goal line.
Per Rogers Redding, it is declined by rule, no score. With exception to illegal touching and intentional grounding, all other penalties are "distance penalties" regardless of where they occur. As written currently, it is declined by rule. We may see a rule change coming this year to cover this play because it has created a lot of discussion. As mentioned in my other post I sent him this play as a "what if " question. It was a once in a blue moon situation. But now that he has seen that this situation is possible I think they would give it another look and prevent Team B from being able to foul in the end zone to prevent a safety. But currently, the penalty is declined by rule according to Redding.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 06, 2013, 12:09am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
Does "distance penalties" mean the distance portion of a penalty enforcement, as I think they meant? Then the illegal forward pass from the end zone would still result in a safety, because 0 distance from the spot still leaves the spot behind their goal line.
As Jason mentioned, it's a distance penalty. Just because it's possible to decline a distance portion of a foul doesn't mean it's not a distance penalty.

I'm part of a very good rules group that meets all summer and I remember covering this exact scenario with them this past summer. It was sorta laughed off as a one-in-a-million scenario, but now that we've seen it happen...
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 06, 2013, 05:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonTX View Post
Per Rogers Redding, it is declined by rule, no score. With exception to illegal touching and intentional grounding, all other penalties are "distance penalties" regardless of where they occur.
Then I think some research as to what the Rules Committee meant by "distance penalty" is in order. In the 2012 NCAA rule book, the phrase occurs exactly 3 times. Once is in 10-2-6, half-the-distance enforcements, and another is in the summary of penalties referencing that provision. The other is 5-2-6, "Fouls Between Downs".

Meanwhile "distance penalties" occurs twice. Once is in the provision referenced here, 8-3-4a, and the other is in 10-2-5, regarding penalties whose distance enforcement would result in free kick restraining lines inside the 5.

I find it very reasonable to interpret all of these occurrences as referring to the distance portion of a penalty that includes a distance enforcement. Otherwise, consider 5-2-6 in light of what "distance penalty" would have to mean as opposed to simply "penalty". The enforcement for any infraction between downs that counts officially as a penalty includes a distance, so the word "distance" in "distance penalty" as used there is superfluous in distinguishing penalties. But as the Committee should not be thought to have put in a superfluous word, the only meaning left would be the distance portion of a penalty. We know that it's possible to decline the distance portion of a penalty separately from the spot the penalty is taken from. So that's what "distance penalty" must mean wherever it occurs in the rule book.

Such a meaning is reasonable, because after possession changes on a try, there's never going to be a down repeated by what had been team B. The only penalties on team B of any consequence are those that prevent a score by B (in which case the spot is immaterial), those that result in a safety (as discussed here, where the distance is immaterial), and those that would be enforced on a succeeding down (which this provision explictly treats separately).

So although the Rules Committee could and should be clearer, Redding kicked this call.
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 06, 2013, 05:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 762
AR 8-3-4 II has a similar play except the foul is a clip in the end zone. The AR states the penalty is declined by rule. As we know NCAA rules have exceptions. The only exception for penalties that are not declined by rule after a change of possession on Trys are Flagrant PF's, UC, Dead Ball PF's, and Live Balls fouls treated as Dead Ball fouls. All other fouls are declined by rule and any scores are cancelled. An illegal forward pass does not fall under any of those exceptions.

So, with this AR it certainly appears to be consistent with Reddings interpretation because even a clipping foul has a "distance penalty"
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2013, 09:43am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
I hate to disagree with Redding, of course.

But if you read this rule, the distance penalty is cancelled. Fine there. Step 2 - Scores by the team that committed the penalty are cancelled. In this case, the score is not made by the team that committed the penalty - it's scored by the other team. This is more similar to a play where A goes for 2, B commits a distance penalty, and A scores anyway - the penalty is declined, but the score is not cancelled.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2013, 10:19am
CT1 CT1 is offline
Official & ***** Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
I hate to disagree with Redding, of course.

But if you read this rule, the distance penalty is cancelled. Fine there. Step 2 - Scores by the team that committed the penalty are cancelled. In this case, the score is not made by the team that committed the penalty - it's scored by the other team. This is more similar to a play where A goes for 2, B commits a distance penalty, and A scores anyway - the penalty is declined, but the score is not cancelled.
Which makes much more sense.
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 07, 2013, 10:21am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by CT1 View Post
Which makes much more sense.
It may make more sense, but it's not the way it's enforced in NCAA at this particular time. As Jason mentioned, there's an approved ruling where there's a clip in the end zone on a try and it, too, is declined by rule.

Maybe this will get changed, maybe it won't, but as of right now, there wouldn't be a safety scored in a game played under NCAA rules if that illegal forward pass was completed and the ball came out of the end zone.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
One Point Safety bkdow Football 30 Sat Sep 25, 2010 06:38pm
Can B be awarded 1-point safety on try? johnnybgood Football 5 Mon Dec 03, 2007 02:12pm
Kentucky won 45-44! 1 point safety johnnybgood Football 34 Wed Nov 28, 2007 04:30pm
1 point safety Jim S Football 28 Sat Nov 12, 2005 01:04pm
One point safety SouthGARef Football 14 Mon Nov 29, 2004 08:16am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:48am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1