Null



Sign in to follow this  
WarTiger

2017 Football Rules and Interpretations

Recommended Posts





New Play:

Auburn/Clemson from several years ago.   Down and distance don’t matter here.  Auburn possession in Clemson territory.   Auburn throws a pass angled toward the sideline and inside the 5 yard line where Clemson intercepts the pass at the 1 and goes into the endzone by the pylon and out the side of the endzone.    Where is the ball spotted?
Answer:  1st and 10 for Clemson at their own 1 yard line.  Why?  Because by rule when a defensive player intercepts a pass or fumble or catches or recovers a kick and he is inside the 5 yard line and his momentum carries him into the endzone the ball comes out to the spot where he gained possession.  

See exception below
SECTION 5. Safety
How Scored
ARTICLE 1. It is a safety when:
a. The ball becomes dead out of bounds behind a goal line, except from
an incomplete forward pass, or becomes dead in the possession of a
player on, above or behind his own goal line, or becomes dead by rule,
and the defending team is responsible for the ball being there (A.R.
6-3-1-IV; A.R. 7-2-4-I; A.R. 8-5-1-I-II, IV and VI-X; A.R. 8-7-2-II;
and A.R. 9-4-1-VIII).
When in question, it is a touchback, not a safety.
Exception:
It is not a safety if a player between his five-yard line and his goal line:
(a) intercepts a pass or fumble; or recovers an opponent’s fumble or
backward pass; or catches or recovers a kick; and
(b) his original momentum carries him into his own end zone; and
(c) the ball remains behind his goal line and is declared dead in his
team’s possession there. This includes a fumble that goes from the
end zone into the field of play and out of bounds (Rule 7-2-4-b-1).
If conditions (a)-(c) are satisfied above, the ball belongs to this
player’s team at the spot where he gained possession.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2017 at 2:40 PM, bigbird said:

So, if tje player has gotten past you, dive at their legs. Anything else will be a horsecollar....brilliant.

my takeaways from the changes:    1-  RBs are gonna love the new "horse collar" rule and 2-   they are tightening the noose around the kick-off return......and soon we will see offensive possessions at beginning of the game and after a score start with the ball on the 25 or 30..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, WarTiger said:

New Play:

Auburn/Clemson from several years ago.   Down and distance don’t matter here.  Auburn possession in Clemson territory.   Auburn throws a pass angled toward the sideline and inside the 5 yard line where Clemson intercepts the pass at the 1 and goes into the endzone by the pylon and out the side of the endzone.    Where is the ball spotted?
Answer:  1st and 10 for Clemson at their own 1 yard line.  Why?  Because by rule when a defensive player intercepts a pass or fumble or catches or recovers a kick and he is inside the 5 yard line and his momentum carries him into the endzone the ball comes out to the spot where he gained possession.  

See exception below
SECTION 5. Safety
How Scored
ARTICLE 1. It is a safety when:
a. The ball becomes dead out of bounds behind a goal line, except from
an incomplete forward pass, or becomes dead in the possession of a
player on, above or behind his own goal line, or becomes dead by rule,
and the defending team is responsible for the ball being there (A.R.
6-3-1-IV; A.R. 7-2-4-I; A.R. 8-5-1-I-II, IV and VI-X; A.R. 8-7-2-II;
and A.R. 9-4-1-VIII).
When in question, it is a touchback, not a safety.
Exception:
It is not a safety if a player between his five-yard line and his goal line:
(a) intercepts a pass or fumble; or recovers an opponent’s fumble or
backward pass; or catches or recovers a kick; and
(b) his original momentum carries him into his own end zone; and
(c) the ball remains behind his goal line and is declared dead in his
team’s possession there. This includes a fumble that goes from the
end zone into the field of play and out of bounds (Rule 7-2-4-b-1).
If conditions (a)-(c) are satisfied above, the ball belongs to this
player’s team at the spot where he gained possession.

 

So this is based on his momentum taking him into the end zone, right?  What about a scenario where he intercepts it at the 1 and is trying to avoid the opposing team so he retreats into the end zone willingly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lkeel75 said:

So this is based on his momentum taking him into the end zone, right?  Correct.  That's why I used the word AND his momentum carries him into the endzone. What about a scenario where he intercepts it at the 1 and is trying to avoid the opposing team so he retreats into the end zone willingly? 

The 2nd sentence would result in a safety.   A pass intercepted (or kick caught) from the 5 yard line to the goal line will either be a safety or return to the spot of the catch.   If momentum isn't responsible for him going into the endzone it will be a safety.  Those will never be touchbacks.   It has to be physically caught in the endzone and downed there (without coming out first) for it to be a touchback.  :) 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New play here that illustrates the difference in penalty enforcement at the college level vs. the High School level.

3rd and 20 for the offense at their own 25. QB back to pass, pass is thrown to #81 at the 35 who is interfered with by defensive player #30. What's the distance penalty and what down will it be?

For College rules, since the penalty occurred less than 15 yards from the line of scrimmage, it's team A's ball 1st and 10 at the spot of the foul. IF the contact had been further than 15 yards from the line of scrimmage it would have been a 15 yard penalty and automatic first down.

For high school it’s a little different. The penalty for high school is 15 yards from the previous spot. But, beginning 2 years ago, it’s NOT an automatic first down any more. So, the play above, by federation rules it will be 3rd and 5 at their own 40

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Play:  Georgia/Nebraska:  Georgia runs a first down play from the opponents 10 yard line.  QB takes the snap from the shotgun formation and hands off to #22...he runs right parallel to the line of scrimmage, where he pulls up to throw the ball.  He is approx. 4 yards or so behind the LOS and right at the sideline.  Under heavy rush, he heaves the ball forward to save the lost yardage.  The ball just reaches the line of scrimmage. Do we have a penalty here of any kind and if so, what?

Answer:  INTENTIONAL GROUNDING - Loss of down at the spot of the foul.  Why?  While the player that threw the ball away was clearly outside the tackle box and the ball just barely reached the line of scrimmage (did not pass it), this rule only applies to the player that took the snap.  The announcers were questioning why they make that call because he was "outside the tackle box".  This is yet another example of how the announcers DO NOT know the rules.  NEVER listen to the announcers when it comes to rule interpretations.

f. The passer to conserve time throws the ball directly to the ground (1) after the ball has already touched the ground; or (2) not immediately after controlling the ball.
g. The passer to conserve time throws the ball forward into an area where there is no eligible Team A receiver (A.R. 7-3-2-II-VII).
h. The passer to conserve yardage throws the ball forward into an area where there is no eligible Team A receiver (A.R. 7-3-2-I).
[Exception: If the passer is or has been outside the tackle box he may throw the ball so that it crosses or lands beyond the neutral zone or neutral zone extended (Rule 2-19-3) (A.R. 7-3-2-VIII-X). This applies only to the player who controls the snap or the resulting backward pass.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question for @WarTiger:  On another thread, there was discussion about the efforts of Coach Saban to get the rule for ineligible receiver downfield changed from beyond 3 yards past the LOS to just 1 yard past the LOS.  My question is what is the equivalent rule in the NFL?  My thinking is that if the current NCAA rule matches what's already being used in the NFL, it's less likely to be changed (and vice versa).  Of course, they are many differences in the rules between the NCAA and the NFL, but it seems as though this would be one where it would make sense for them to be similar as it can make a big difference in offensive philosophy (and, consequently, defensive philosophy). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, triangletiger said:

Question for @WarTiger:  On another thread, there was discussion about the efforts of Coach Saban to get the rule for ineligible receiver downfield changed from beyond 3 yards past the LOS to just 1 yard past the LOS.  My question is what is the equivalent rule in the NFL?  My thinking is that if the current NCAA rule matches what's already being used in the NFL, it's less likely to be changed (and vice versa).  Of course, they are many differences in the rules between the NCAA and the NFL, but it seems as though this would be one where it would make sense for them to be similar as it can make a big difference in offensive philosophy (and, consequently, defensive philosophy). 

I can actually answer that, because that is Saban's reasoning for the change.  The rule is 1 yard in the NFL.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lionheartkc said:

I can actually answer that, because that is Saban's reasoning for the change.  The rule is 1 yard in the NFL.

Thanks, and listening to the Auburn All-Access podcast it sounds as if the rule was actually changed to three yards in the recent past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, triangletiger said:

Question for @WarTiger:  On another thread, there was discussion about the efforts of Coach Saban to get the rule for ineligible receiver downfield changed from beyond 3 yards past the LOS to just 1 yard past the LOS.  My question is what is the equivalent rule in the NFL?  I have no idea.  My thinking is that if the current NCAA rule matches what's already being used in the NFL, it's less likely to be changed (and vice versa).  Of course, they are many differences in the rules between the NCAA and the NFL, but it seems as though this would be one where it would make sense for them to be similar as it can make a big difference in offensive philosophy (and, consequently, defensive philosophy). 

I don't watch the NFL at all.  A lot of that has to do with the stupid rules they have in place.  Many of those stupid rules have filtered down to the college game and I'm not a fan of  them at all.    The ineligible player down field rule is at 3 yards in high school and college and it doesn't need to be changed.    I wish the college game would get rid of those "nfl" rules they have adopted over the last 7-8 years. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, triangletiger said:

Thanks, and listening to the Auburn All-Access podcast it sounds as if the rule was actually changed to three yards in the recent past.

It's been 3 yards as long as I've been officiating ( or as long as I can remember anyway).  I've been officiating for 27 years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now the college changes:

2. Players are now required to wear knee pads and pants that cover the knees. .
 

So watching the first few games and just now Wiscosin v Utah St...  just about every D back and wide receiver's Knees are uncovered with their pants above the knee and no knee pads covering the knees ... running backs and LB's too... both teams. I was like... Guess they aren't calling it / enforcing it??

So I Checked and apparently,

They are not starting to  / enforcing this until 2018.. since teams already had bought equipment and such...

From SB Nation article linked below;


3. Pants must cover knees ... soon.

Beginning in 2018, players’ pants must have knee pads such that the pants and the pads cover the knees. Previously, the rules recommended that the knees be covered, but this was not required. The committee is delaying implementation of the mandate until 2018 because a number of schools have already bought equipment for the year. There is great concern throughout the football world about the tendency for some players to wear “biker’s shorts” that only come to within several inches of the knee. This is a safety issue as well as one that does not present a good look for the game.

When it comes to looks, I’ll trust popular college students before I trust career officials, but these other points are noted.



https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/8/25/16194528/new-rules-2017-changes-horse-collar-leaping-penalties


So just FYI... in case you still see some players basically sportin  bike shorts...

Edited by JGLEATON
added credit for info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, JGLEATON said:

Now the college changes:

2. Players are now required to wear knee pads and pants that cover the knees. .
 

So watching the first few games and just now Wiscosin v Utah St...  just about every D back and wide receiver's Knees are uncovered with their pants above the knee and no knee pads covering the knees ... running backs and LB's too... both teams. I was like... Guess they aren't calling it / enforcing it??

So I Checked and apparently,

They are not starting to  / enforcing this until 2018.. since teams already had bought equipment and such...

From SB Nation article linked below;


3. Pants must cover knees ... soon.

Beginning in 2018, players’ pants must have knee pads such that the pants and the pads cover the knees. Previously, the rules recommended that the knees be covered, but this was not required. The committee is delaying implementation of the mandate until 2018 because a number of schools have already bought equipment for the year. There is great concern throughout the football world about the tendency for some players to wear “biker’s shorts” that only come to within several inches of the knee. This is a safety issue as well as one that does not present a good look for the game.

When it comes to looks, I’ll trust popular college students before I trust career officials, but these other points are noted.



https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/8/25/16194528/new-rules-2017-changes-horse-collar-leaping-penalties


So just FYI... in case you still see some players basically sportin  bike shorts...

Good stuff.  nice find.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New play.  Just happened Missouri vs. Missouri State.  Missouri has possession and on a long run toward the goal line, the ball carrier dives from approx. the 3 yard line into the endzone.  The nearest opponent was approx. 5-6 yards behind him.   PENALTY.   Unsportsmanlike Conduct.  15 yard penalty from the spot of the foul.  Take the touchdown off the board and its 1st and 10 from the 18.    Announcers are questioning why they took the touchdown away, why?  Because the announcers are clueless when it comes to rule interpretations.  They also don't think it's a penalty or perhaps that it shouldn't be.  However, its specifically outlined in the rules as a penalty and it was correctly penalized and enforced.

a. Specifically prohibited acts and conduct include:
1. No player, substitute, coach or other person subject to the rules
shall use abusive, threatening or obscene language or gestures, or
engage in such acts that provoke ill will or are demeaning to an
opponent, to game officials or to the image of the game, including
but not limited to:
(a) Pointing the finger(s), hand(s), arm(s) or ball at an opponent,
or imitating the slashing of the throat.
(b) Taunting, baiting or ridiculing an opponent verbally.
(c) Inciting an opponent or spectators in any other way, such as
simulating the firing of a weapon or placing a hand by the
ear to request recognition.
(d) Any delayed, excessive, prolonged or choreographed act by
which a player (or players) attempts to focus attention upon
himself (or themselves).
(e) An unopposed ball carrier obviously altering stride as he
approaches the opponent’s goal line or diving into the end
zone.

There are more but this covers this play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, WarTiger said:

New play.  Just happened Missouri vs. Missouri State.  Missouri has possession and on a long run toward the goal line, the ball carrier dives from approx. the 3 yard line into the endzone.  The nearest opponent was approx. 5-6 yards behind him.   PENALTY.   Unsportsmanlike Conduct.  15 yard penalty from the spot of the foul.  Take the touchdown off the board and its 1st and 10 from the 18.    Announcers are questioning why they took the touchdown away, why?  Because the announcers are clueless when it comes to rule interpretations.  They also don't think it's a penalty or perhaps that it shouldn't be.  However, its specifically outlined in the rules as a penalty and it was correctly penalized and enforced.

a. Specifically prohibited acts and conduct include:
1. No player, substitute, coach or other person subject to the rules
shall use abusive, threatening or obscene language or gestures, or
engage in such acts that provoke ill will or are demeaning to an
opponent, to game officials or to the image of the game, including
but not limited to:
(a) Pointing the finger(s), hand(s), arm(s) or ball at an opponent,
or imitating the slashing of the throat.
(b) Taunting, baiting or ridiculing an opponent verbally.
(c) Inciting an opponent or spectators in any other way, such as
simulating the firing of a weapon or placing a hand by the
ear to request recognition.
(d) Any delayed, excessive, prolonged or choreographed act by
which a player (or players) attempts to focus attention upon
himself (or themselves).
(e) An unopposed ball carrier obviously altering stride as he
approaches the opponent’s goal line or diving into the end
zone.

There are more but this covers this play.

Didn't they start this last year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, lkeel75 said:

Didn't they start this last year?

I believe its actually been in place now for several years. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Play in our game tonight vs. Clemson.   Auburn possession, snap, hand off to the RB, RB runs to the right side, hands it off to a back coming back around, then that RB pitches the ball back to Stidham.  Under heavy rush, Stidham throws the ball away to avoid the loss yardage.    Penalty:  INTENTIONAL GROUNDING.    While the QB was clearly outside the tackle box, he's not allowed to throw the ball away to save lost yardage once he gives the ball  up.  Here's the rule on it.  I wasn't aware this was there, but its highlighted in the book meaning its a change this year.   The Italics portion is new to the book this year.

[Exception: It is not a foul if the passer is or has been outside the tackle
box and throws the ball so that it crosses or lands beyond the neutral
zone or neutral zone extended (Rule 2-19-3) (A.R. 7-3-2-VIII-X).
This applies only to the player who controls the snap or the resulting
backward pass and retains possession before throwing the forward pass.]

PENALTY [f-h]—Loss of down at the spot of the foul [S36 and S9].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2017 at 11:23 PM, WarTiger said:

Play in our game tonight vs. Clemson.   Auburn possession, snap, hand off to the RB, RB runs to the right side, hands it off to a back coming back around, then that RB pitches the ball back to Stidham.  Under heavy rush, Stidham throws the ball away to avoid the loss yardage.    Penalty:  INTENTIONAL GROUNDING.    While the QB was clearly outside the tackle box, he's not allowed to throw the ball away to save lost yardage once he gives the ball  up.  Here's the rule on it.  I wasn't aware this was there, but its highlighted in the book meaning its a change this year.   The Italics portion is new to the book this year.

[Exception: It is not a foul if the passer is or has been outside the tackle
box and throws the ball so that it crosses or lands beyond the neutral
zone or neutral zone extended (Rule 2-19-3) (A.R. 7-3-2-VIII-X).
This applies only to the player who controls the snap or the resulting
backward pass and retains possession before throwing the forward pass.]

PENALTY [f-h]—Loss of down at the spot of the foul [S36 and S9].

 

So, other than completing the pass, what did Stidham/Auburn have to do to make this not a penalty?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, API said:

So, other than completing the pass, what did Stidham/Auburn have to do to make this not a penalty?

Running the same play, the only way to avoid that penalty would be to throw it at an eligible receivers feet or complete the pass. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every single week my opinion of announcers and their lack of knowledge when it comes to rules, gets confirmed.   Just a few minutes ago, Cal/USC,  Greg [uater] McElroy is the latest.    Down and distance don't matter.  Offensive play to the right side.  Tackle on the left side delays a second and moves to the right and blocks the defender low at the back of the legs.   Officials correctly throw the flag and correctly make the call.  Personal Foul, Clipping.     Replay, McElroy said he has to be engaged with another blocker and he doesn't agree with the call there.      What McElroy exposed was his complete ignorance of the rules and not having any idea what the difference is between a clip and a chop block. 

SECTION 5. Clipping
ARTICLE 1. a. Clipping is a block against an opponent in which the force
of the initial contact is from behind and at or below the waist (Rule 9-1-5).
b. The position of the blocker’s head or feet does not necessarily indicate
the point of initial contact.

text book example of what happened during the play  not one mention above about a high/low combination block.

What he said needed to be in place to be a penalty.

Chop Block
ARTICLE 3. A chop block is a high-low or low-high combination block
by any two players against an opponent (not the ball carrier) anywhere on
the field, with or without a delay between blocks; the “low” component is
at the opponent’s thigh or below. (A.R. 9-1-10-I-IV). It is not a foul if the
blockers’ opponent initiates the contact. (A.R. 9-1-10-V)

 

So, I repeat.  Never listed to announcers when it comes to rule interpretations.  McElroy exposed his lack of knowledge there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a new play.  Happened earlier today in the Vanderbilt / Florida game.   Vanderbilt with possession, Vanderbilt QB back to pass, scrambles under heavy pressure. On the opposite side of the formation behind the QB, a Florida player loses his helmet. He continues to pursue the QB and assists his teammate in making the tackle for a loss. The other Florida player that made the tackle, grabs the QB facemask. So, we have TWO penalties here. 1. Facemask - 15 yards [this one was declined], 2. Personal Foul [participating without helmet] - 15 yards. Once a player loses his helmet he MUST stop participating in the play. If he continues to participate its a 15 yard penalty.  Since the opponent can only accept one live ball penalty, Vanderbilt elects to take the 2nd one for participation without a helmet.

Continued Participation Without Helmet
ARTICLE 17. A player whose helmet comes completely off during a down
may not continue to participate beyond the immediate action in which he
is engaged, whether or not he puts the helmet back on during the down.
(A.R. 9-1-17-I)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rewatching the game from yesterday and had a play or two I wanted to look at closer.    With 6:39 to play in the 3rd quarter, Auburn snapping the ball from the Mississippi State 40 yard line.  Stidham is going deep (to the endzone) on this play to #81 (slayton) and the pass is incomplete.   Officials flag us for an Ineligible player down field.   The white hat's explanation was an eligible number was covered up.   Well, this was a failure all the way around by the calling official.   Here's a screen shot of the formation:

23hoy8x.jpg

 

What we have here is 33 (hastings), 3 (craig-Meyers and 81 (Darius Slayton) that are in the backfield.    11 (Kyle Davis is on the line of scrimmage.   At the snap, Davis takes a step and stops and never goes down field (he could have legally gone down field).   Hastings,  Craig-Myers and Slayton all go down field.   Not one of them was covered up by anybody.    What they really should have flagged here was an ILLEGAL FORMATION.   With Hastings, Craig-Meyers and Slayton in the backfield along with Stidham and the RB, there were 5 in the backfield.    This wasn't an ineligible downfield, it was an illegal formation.   Judging by how the play was executed, its my opinion that Meyers should have been up on the line.  Had that been the case, the same players could have still legally gone downfield (remember Davis never did).    They missed this call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WarTiger said:

Rewatching the game from yesterday and had a play or two I wanted to look at closer.    With 6:39 to play in the 3rd quarter, Auburn snapping the ball from the Mississippi State 40 yard line.  Stidham is going deep (to the endzone) on this play to #81 (slayton) and the pass is incomplete.   Officials flag us for an Ineligible player down field.   The white hat's explanation was an eligible number was covered up.   Well, this was a failure all the way around by the calling official.   Here's a screen shot of the formation:

23hoy8x.jpg

 

What we have here is 33 (hastings), 3 (craig-Meyers and 81 (Darius Slayton) that are in the backfield.    11 (Kyle Davis is on the line of scrimmage.   At the snap, Davis takes a step and stops and never goes down field (he could have legally gone down field).   Hastings,  Craig-Myers and Slayton all go down field.   Not one of them was covered up by anybody.    What they really should have flagged here was an ILLEGAL FORMATION.   With Hastings, Craig-Meyers and Slayton in the backfield along with Stidham and the RB, there were 5 in the backfield.    This wasn't an ineligible downfield, it was an illegal formation.   Judging by how the play was executed, its my opinion that Meyers should have been up on the line.  Had that been the case, the same players could have still legally gone downfield (remember Davis never did).    They missed this call.

I was re-watching when I saw this as well.  When they called the ineligible down field I backed it up to see who.  My first view on it was the 11 and 3 were both on the line, 33 and 81 were off the line, which made 11 covered and ineligible.  But as you noted, he did not go down field - so no penalty.  I think the line judge must have seen 3 go downfield and thought it was the inside guy that was covered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another example of why you shouldn't listen to announcers when it comes to rule interpretations.

Just happened in the South Carolina/Tennessee game.  Don't remember who had the ball but they throw a pass down the sideline, flag for pass interference.  Replay shows the defender holding the WR by the jersey for at least 3-5 yards.  Ball in the air and the announcer says that it should be holding and not pass interference.    Clearly the announcer has no idea that a hold of an eligible wide receiver with the ball in the air is ALWAYS pass Interference and always has been.   If the pass had never been thrown it would have been a defensive holding penalty.  But because the ball was in the air, and the pass was beyond the neutral zone,  its always pass interference.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this