Face Mask Penalty

[Wezsh0T]

I don't think Star4Ever was trying to find a loophole necessarily. I think he, like I, just wondered what the actual rule was...quite interesting...

Doesn't make the loss any easier.

 

[iceberg]

Here's the rule from the NFL site.

Digest of Rules

Foul on Last Play of Half or Game


1. On a foul by defense on last play of half or game, the down is replayed if penalty is accepted.
2. On a foul by the offense on last play of half or game, the down is not replayed and the play in which the foul is committed is nullified.
Exception: Fair catch interference, foul following change of possession, illegal touching. No score by offense counts.
Look it up? Yea, I did and I'm right.

You want the link? Here it is.
http://www.nfl.com/fans/rules/foulonlastplay

did you read the 1st opening paragraph about this "digest"?

Digest of Rules

This Digest of Rules of the National Football League has been prepared to aid players, fans, and members of the press, radio, and television media in their understanding of the game.


It is not meant to be a substitute for the official rule book. In any case of conflict between these explanations and the official rules, the rules always have precedence.
In order to make it easier to coordinate the information in this digest, the topics discussed generally follow the order of the rule book.

----

understand all i'm saying at this point is you're gloating over a "cliffnote" version of the official rulebook. hos is likely talking specifics of a rule you'd need the entire rulebook to understand.

i do agree i've not seen a game continue due to an offensive foul, but i'd like to understand what hos is saying vs. looking to say he's wrong.

can you elaborate hos?

 

[BourbonBalz]

Personally, I think this argument is about semantics. Change of possession is an exception as stated in the rule book, and answers my orignal question. It does not, however, change the fact that a game can end on an offensive penalty, as I've stated. Again, that's all I have been saying and we've beaten this horse to death.

 

[Hostile]

did you read the 1st opening paragraph about this "digest"?

Digest of Rules

This Digest of Rules of the National Football League has been prepared to aid players, fans, and members of the press, radio, and television media in their understanding of the game.


It is not meant to be a substitute for the official rule book. In any case of conflict between these explanations and the official rules, the rules always have precedence.
In order to make it easier to coordinate the information in this digest, the topics discussed generally follow the order of the rule book.

----

understand all i'm saying at this point is you're gloating over a "cliffnote" version of the official rulebook. hos is likely talking specifics of a rule you'd need the entire rulebook to understand.

i do agree i've not seen a game continue due to an offensive foul, but i'd like to understand what hos is saying vs. looking to say he's wrong.

can you elaborate hos?

I can try.

Scenario 1...

Offense throws a Hail Mary and the WR pushes off and draws an offensive PI penalty then catches the ball for the TD.

The defense will accept the penalty and negate the play. In this case the down is not replayed. Game no longer in doubt, as long as it is not a tie.




Scenario 2...

Same as above, but the defense draws the penalty and catch is made, but there is no score.

The offense will accept the penalty, because if they accept the result of the play, then the game is over. No longer in doubt.




Scenario 3...

Again, same as above, defensive PI, no catch.

The offense will accept the penalty and try one last time to win the game. Game result in doubt.




Scenario 4...

Game tied. That is crucial to this point. Offense tries the Hail Mary and defense intercepts the ball. Change of possession, thus the exception noted above. If the offense committs a penalty before tackling the defender then the game result is considered still in doubt. The other team now has a chance to remove the doubt of the game.

The only reason the tie is crucial to the point is because if the defense is ahead they don't need one last play to decide the outcome. They can simply fall on the ball.



When the game final result is in doubt there will always be one last play by the offense or special teams to try and win the game.

That's what we saw. Period.

 

[iceberg]

I can try.

Scenario 1...

Offense throws a Hail Mary and the WR pushes off and draws an offensive PI penalty then catches the ball for the TD.

The defense will accept the penalty and negate the play. In this case the down is not replayed. Game no longer in doubt, as long as it is not a tie.

let me stick with this one first. the offense committed the penalty and time had expired but scored. if they refuse the penalty they lose, so they take it. if they take it then why do they not replay the down?

if they don't replay the down then the game ended on on an offensive penalty. isn't that the point we're trying to say it won't end on an O penalty as time expires?

 

[BourbonBalz]

Yes, Iceberg, that's the only point I've been trying to make.

 

[iceberg]

Yes, Iceberg, that's the only point I've been trying to make.

i'm just digging for the viewpoint. : )

 

[Hostile]

let me stick with this one first. the offense committed the penalty and time had expired but scored. if they refuse the penalty they lose, so they take it. if they take it then why do they not replay the down?

if they don't replay the down then the game ended on on an offensive penalty. isn't that the point we're trying to say it won't end on an O penalty as time expires?

It's really pretty simple actually. In the regular flow of the game when the offense commits a penalty they don't put the time back on the clock even though the play is negated.

Same concept at game's end.

If there is still time on the clock the offense can try again. If there's no time then the game ends. It's just part of the regular conclusion of the game.

 

[BourbonBalz]

In scenario # 4, the penalty would not be on the offense, it would be on the defense since the ball has changed hands. That was the point of my initial question. I was wondering if a team can change from offense to defense during a play and apparently it can. A player that intercepts a pass (or in this case picks up a blocked kick) is now the offensive player and if a penalty is committed against him, it is committed by the defense. Since a play cannot end on a defensive penalty, another play has to be run (like today). Again, if you look at scenario # 1, that's exactly what I've been trying to say all along. A game can end on an offensive penalty. It cannot end on any defensive penalty.

 

[iceberg]

It's really pretty simple actually. In the regular flow of the game when the offense commits a penalty they don't put the time back ont he clock even though the play is negated.

Same concept at game's end.

If there is still time on the clock the offense can try again. If there's no time then the game ends. It's just part of the regular conclusion of the game.

then how can the game "not" end on an O penalty?

 

[Doomsday]

Whether the game should end on a penalty or not should be pointless there is no way in HE** that was a 15 yard penalty. It is unreal the refs would give away a game on a ridicilous call like that.

 

[Hostile]

then how can the game "not" end on an O penalty?

Because there is a stated exception for change of possession and in this case a tie game.

If the defense was ahead and they got the ball, they'd fall on it. Game over.

Since it was a tie it meant they had a right to result of the penalty and an attempt to win the game themselves. Which they did.

Hence, the "game result still in doubt."

 

[Hostile]

Whether the game should end on a penalty or not should be pointless there is no way in HE** that was a 15 yard penalty. It is unreal the refs would give away a game on a ridicilous call like that.

There's another thread discussing that.

This is a football discussion that is talking about the rules. It is not pointless by any wild stretch. In fact it is a good thread because it illicits discussion and educates us so there's no need to be bitter.

 

[iceberg]

Because there is a stated exception for change of possession and in this case a tie game.

If the defense was ahead and they got the ball, they'd fall on it. Game over.

Since it was a tie it meant they had a right to result of the penalty and an attempt to win the game themselves. Which they did.

Hence, the "game result still in doubt."

i'm too tired to think about this right now but i sense some logic in there somewhere. : )

 

[big dog cowboy]

I need some asprin after reading all this thread.

 

[BourbonBalz]

then how can the game "not" end on an O penalty?

DAMN, you've got to be kidding. IT CAN!!!!! That's the whole point here.

 

[BourbonBalz]

The penalty today was not an offensive penalty it was a defensive penalty. That's why the Skins got another play. Regardless of that, it was a change of possession which is an exception for even offensive penalties.

 

[Hostile]

i'm too tired to think about this right now but i sense some logic in there somewhere. : )

Let me try this.

Any time there is a single penalty on one team or the other there are 2 choices.

Accept the result of the play.

...or...

Accept the penalty.


The ball changed possession on that play and there was a penalty. The infraction is added to the end of the play and since there was still doubt about the result of the game, the infringed upon team has the right to one play with no time on the clock.

No different than if we kicked a FG from the 1 yard line because of a PI call in the endzone with no time left.

The clock is at zero but the game result is not determined. Therefore the team in possession of the ball has a right to decide the game.

Once there is a change of possession Kyle Kosier became a defender. The game cannot end on a defensive penalty. We were the defense at that point.

 

[BourbonBalz]

Actually Hostile, this ruling had nothing to do with "game still in doubt". I guess you can look at it that way because the game was tied, but the ruling was due to the penalty being on the defense (Dallas). Obviously if the Skins were ahead at that point, they would not have run another play. Again, I think we're just arguing semantics.

 

[iceberg]

Actually Hostile, this ruling had nothing to do with "game still in doubt". I guess you can look at it that way because the game was tied, but the ruling was due to the penalty being on the defense (Dallas). Obviously if the Skins were ahead at that point, they would not have run another play. Again, I think we're just arguing semantics.

it's better than a qb debate argument. : )