What you got?

[OKREF]

A1 intercepts a pass. During the return, at the 35 yard line, A2 blocks B1 on the sideline. Big hit and both guys fly into team A bench area. As B1 is trying to get up, he is surrounded by 10 to 15 team A players, all jumping up and celebrating. As B1 is trying to get away A3, who is a non player gets in B1's face and chest bumps him, B1 then shoves A3. The interception is returned for a touchdown. What is your ruling?

[JRutledge]

I will admit I was a little confused over the fact you said A1 intercepted the ball. Team A was on offense at the start of the down in rulebook language. I will give you a pass if you are not a football official (I am not sure you are at the time of posting this).

If you call a penalty for Unsporting or Personal Foul, it can be tacked onto the scoring play.

You give the scoring team the option to take the penalties on the try or the kick off.

Peace

[BoBo]

I am like J Rut so i will try to clarify as i answer.

Defense man #25 intercepts the ball.

Defense man #55 blocks Offense man #80 near the defensive teams team box area.

They block ends in the defensive team box area.

The defense team is whooping up the big hit. Defense team #66 a non player in the team area chest bumps into Off #80. #80 retaliates with a shove.

The interception for the TD stands.

I would go dead ball off setting UNS on #80 and #66. The try from the 3 yard line.

If i understand your play correctly

[OKREF]

I am, and I know the difference. My bad. Was just starting the play after the interception. So we have unsportsmanlike penalties on both teams. Touchdown stands, penalties offset and the try is from the three, correct?

Isn't the foul on the retaliation, a personel foul, and the foul on the non player an unsportsmanlike foul? They weren't dead ball fouls it was during the return.

[HLin NC]

Can't be usc if using Fed rules as there was contact by both, must be PF.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

Can't be usc if using Fed rules as there was contact by both, must be PF.

That is what I had. Two PF. But shouldn't the foul on the non-player have been an US? My question is if it's a foul on a non-player does it have to be US even though there was contact?

[ump33]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

Can't be usc if using Fed rules as there was contact by both, must be PF.

+1

Changing the A's & B's ... and assuming that the degree of roughness of the contact by B3 & A1 was such that it warranted a flag versus a "separate & talk to"

- B1 intercepts a pass. During the return, at the 35 yard line, B2 blocks A1 on the sideline. Big hit and both guys fly into team B bench area. - Legal up to here
- As A1 is trying to get up, he is surrounded by 10 to 15 team B players, all jumping up and celebrating. As A1 is trying to get away B3, who is a non player gets in A1's face and chest bumps him - Non-Player foul on B3, enforce from Succeeding Spot 10-4-5c
- A1 then shoves B3 - PF on A1, if the foul happened during the return it is a Live Ball Foul enforced with "either or" per 8-2-2 before the foul by B3. If after the score it is DB and enforce both fouls with "either or" in the order of occurrence 8-2-4 & 8-2-5
- The interception is returned for a touchdown.
- What is your ruling The touchdown counts and ... If A1's foul is live ball, B gets 1st choice of enforcing on the try or subsequent KO followed by A's choice of try or subsequent KO. If A1's foul is dead ball, A gets 1st choice of enforcing on the try or subsequent KO followed by B's choice of try or subsequent KO. It is possible that B3 & A1 have also earned the right to watch the remainder of the game by way of disqualification

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by ump33

[COLOR="Blue"]Changing the A's & B's

Hey, why assume it was the 1st CoP during that down? ;-)

... and assuming that the degree of roughness of the contact by B3 & A1 was such that it warranted a flag versus a "separate & talk to"

- B1 intercepts a pass. During the return, at the 35 yard line, B2 blocks A1 on the sideline. Big hit and both guys fly into team B bench area. - Legal up to here
- As A1 is trying to get up, he is surrounded by 10 to 15 team B players, all jumping up and celebrating. As A1 is trying to get away B3, who is a non player gets in A1's face and chest bumps him - Non-Player foul on B3, enforce from Succeeding Spot 10-4-5c
- A1 then shoves B3[COLOR="Blue"] - PF on A1,

Can a personal foul be committed by a player vs. a substitute or other non-participant?

[jchamp]

If the OOB contact was against a player who could plausibly return to the field and make a play, could it be considered illegal participation, LB foul? And would that be enforced at the spot? Or at the spot the player went OOB?

[JRutledge]

I am sorry, because of the classifications it did not dawn on my that the defensive player got in the face of a player on the sideline.

These are not offsetting penalties because they are different incidents or took place in a proper order. And one is a personal foul and the other is an unsporting foul. You cannot offset those in NF rules. The classification of the players also does not matter, because both penalties are treated as dead ball fouls regardless of when they actually took place.

So the option is to penalize the "defense" first and penalize on the try in this case.

The second penalty on the "offense" that was scored on, can be penalized on the try or the kick off.

If the "defense" is penalized on the try, then the ball would not go back to the 3 yard line. The ball would be taking to the 18 and the next penalty could be taken back to the 9.

If the "defense" does not want to take the penalty on the try, then the kick off the penalty can be applied. I would think both penalties would be taken on the try considering how far away the ball would be from the goal line.

Peace

[OKREF]

Ok. Let me clarify. B23 intercepts a pass. At the 35 yd line B10 blocks A2 and they end up OOB and in the team B bench area. 10-15 team B players surround A2. Whooping it up. B2is trying to get away, as he is, non-player A1 jumps and gets in the face of B2 and bumps him, A2 then shoves B1. All of this happens during the interception return for a touchdown, prior to the score. They are both live ball fouls.

So do we have two personal fouls? Or 1 PF, and 1 US? These are contact fouls so you can't have US, correct? Or even though it is contact, is the foul by a non player an US? Can a non player get a PF?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Ok. Let me clarify. B23 intercepts a pass. At the 35 yd line B10 blocks A2 and they end up OOB and in the team B bench area. 10-15 team B players surround A2. Whooping it up. A2 is trying to get away, as he is, non-player A1 jumps and gets in the face of B2 and bumps him, A2 then shoves B1. All of this happens during the interception return for a touchdown, prior to the score. They are both live ball fouls.

So do we have two personal fouls? Or 1 PF, and 1 US?

Personal foul has to be for contact. Unsporting is for non-contact acts. Now if the penalty for the A1 jumping up is enough, I would go with USC. If the bump is what was for alarm, then call it a PF. Heck depending on the entire action, you could have two different penalties on A1, but that would a HTBT situation.

And they are live ball fouls that are treated like dead ball fouls. Personal fouls are enforced at the previous spot unless there is a special enforcement portion like what happens with the opponent of the scoring team.

Peace

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Ok. Let me clarify. B23 intercepts a pass. At the 35 yd line B10 blocks A2 and they end up OOB and in the team B bench area. 10-15 team B players surround A2.

If there might be as many as 15, they wouldn't all have been players. You might have a combination of players & substitutes from B, i.e. participating & non-participating partisans, or they might all have been subs from B.

Whooping it up. A2 is trying to get away, as he is, non-player A1 jumps and gets in the face of B2 and bumps him, A2 then shoves B1. All of this happens during the interception return for a touchdown, prior to the score. They are both live ball fouls.

So do we have two personal fouls? Or 1 PF, and 1 US? These are contact fouls so you can't have US, correct? Or even though it is contact, is the foul by a non player an US? Can a non player get a PF?

My question is, what if A2 shoved B1, and B1 was not a player? Wouldn't A2's action then have to have been UC or nothing? Can't have a personal foul by a player vs. a non-player, can you?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Personal foul has to be for contact. Unsporting is for non-contact acts.

What about contact acts vs. non-players? Like, say, a player slugs an official. That can't be a PF, can it? So it must be UC.

I think that's likely what you had in the previously stated scenario: contact by a player vs. a non-player that might be a personal foul (unnecessary roughness) if committed by player vs. player, but would have to be either unsportsmanlike conduct or nothing if committed by a player vs. a sub in the opposing bench area.

If the player(s) in the bench area are deemed to be participating illegally by interfering with play even if out of bounds, do they then instantly become players & hence eligible to be personally fouled? Could the same be true of a trainer, coach, towel boy...?

So I turned to the Fed rules for clarif'n, and came up with...mud. I see unnecessary roughness (contact that is unnecessary and may tend to promote roughness) is identified, like most personal fouls, in terms of contact with an "opponent"...and the rules never define "opponent". I was hoping either the Team Designation or Participation provisions would clarify the matter, but unless someone can explain otherwise, they don't. It is possible for nonplayers to illegally participate by committing acts against an "opponent", but it doesn't seem to say anything about vice versa in cases where the opponent is a player. One might assume that if X is an opponent of Y, Y must be an opponent of X, but that's a thin reed to lean on in this case. And if makes a difference here because whether the action by the player who has unintentionally left the field and gotten embroiled in a situation among the other team's subs is ruled a personal foul or an unsportsmanlike act matters in terms of penalty enforcement. My hunch would be that any fouls by partisans of either team in that situation would have to be considered UC rather than PF.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

What about contact acts vs. non-players? Like, say, a player slugs an official. That can't be a PF, can it? So it must be UC.

OK, but that has nothing to do with the play described. No official was harmed in this play.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I think that's likely what you had in the previously stated scenario: contact by a player vs. a non-player that might be a personal foul (unnecessary roughness) if committed by player vs. player, but would have to be either unsportsmanlike conduct or nothing if committed by a player vs. a sub in the opposing bench area.

If I taunt someone, it can be USC. And PF apply to both players and non-players.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

If the player(s) in the bench area are deemed to be participating illegally by interfering with play even if out of bounds, do they then instantly become players & hence eligible to be personally fouled? Could the same be true of a trainer, coach, towel boy...?

Well you cannot be a player unless you are one of the 22 in the game. Non-players are anyone including coach, substitute, attendant or replaced player. And the PF Rule 10-4 applies to players and non-players.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

So I turned to the Fed rules for clarif'n, and came up with...mud. I see unnecessary roughness (contact that is unnecessary and may tend to promote roughness) is identified, like most personal fouls, in terms of contact with an "opponent"...and the rules never define "opponent". I was hoping either the Team Designation or Participation provisions would clarify the matter, but unless someone can explain otherwise, they don't. It is possible for nonplayers to illegally participate by committing acts against an "opponent", but it doesn't seem to say anything about vice versa in cases where the opponent is a player. One might assume that if X is an opponent of Y, Y must be an opponent of X, but that's a thin reed to lean on in this case. And if makes a difference here because whether the action by the player who has unintentionally left the field and gotten embroiled in a situation among the other team's subs is ruled a personal foul or an unsportsmanlike act matters in terms of penalty enforcement. My hunch would be that any fouls by partisans of either team in that situation would have to be considered UC rather than PF.

You could have two fouls here. You could have a PF for the "chest bump" and the getting in the face ans saying things to your opponent. It is just a matter of if you want to call both or one or the other.

Peace