|
|
#1
12-30-2005, 03:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Football Rules- Why don\'t teams decline this kind of penalty?
OK football folks, this bothers me but maybe I missing something. Common scenario, it arose in last nights Holiday bowl in the 4th quarter with like 10 minutes left when Oklahoma had the ball on the Oregon 32 facing 4th and 9 up 10 points I think and took a delay of game penalty to give their punter more room to kick.
Why didn't Oregon decline the penalty? One obvious answer is they couldn't decline the penalty, but Rule 10, section 1, article 1, subsection (b) of the NCAA football rules states "any panalty may be declined." I assume this rule is the same in the nfl. So is this an etiquitte thing (which sounds like a silly rational to me, the game is about winning), or are a lot of coaches making an error here, or am I missing something? Thanks, J.R. 
|
|
#2
12-30-2005, 03:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Football Rules- Why don\'t teams decline this kind of penalty?
I'm not familiar with the rulebook, but I'm virtually positive that (in the NFL at least), pre-snap penalties cannot be declined.
Many (10ish) years ago, I was watching a Seahawks game. Seattle intercepted a pass and returned it for a TD. It got overturned, though, because the opposition committed a false start (and the play happened because the players ignored the whistle). I adamantly insisted that they should decline the penalty, but alas, they couldn't. I cried. Josh
|
|
#3
12-30-2005, 03:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Football Rules- Why don\'t teams decline this kind of penalty?
A procedure penalty negates the play, there never was an interception in that scenario because the play was blown dead. But that doesn't mean Seattle couldn't decline the penalty as I understand it, only that there would be no reason to decline that penalty.
|
|
#4
12-30-2005, 04:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Football Rules- Why don\'t teams decline this kind of penalty?
Maybe they are worried they will convince the team to try the field goal instead of the punt if they don't let them back up. Letting them back up guarantees a punt.
|
|
#5
12-30-2005, 04:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Football Rules- Why don\'t teams decline this kind of penalty?
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe they are worried they will convince the team to try the field goal instead of the punt if they don't let them back up. Letting them back up guarantees a punt. [/ QUOTE ] This doesn't make any sense at all. Why would the offensive team let the defense decide if it was going to go for a field goal? -McGee
|
|
#8
12-30-2005, 06:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Football Rules- Why don\'t teams decline this kind of penalty?
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not familiar with the rulebook, but I'm virtually positive that (in the NFL at least), pre-snap penalties cannot be declined. Many (10ish) years ago, I was watching a Seahawks game. Seattle intercepted a pass and returned it for a TD. It got overturned, though, because the opposition committed a false start (and the play happened because the players ignored the whistle). I adamantly insisted that they should decline the penalty, but alas, they couldn't. I cried. Josh [/ QUOTE ] This is different, because there was a wistle (and therefore no play). If seattle had declined the penalty (I don't know if they could have or not)in the situation you describe, the opposition would have kept the ball (since there was no play). Once the wistle is blown, the play MUST be over. Perhapse some players on the opposition heard the wistle, and therefore didn't try to catch the player that was returning the pass. Players are taught to stop playing at the wistle and are sometimes penalized if they don't. Therefore, when the wistle blows, the play MUST be over.
|
|
#9
12-30-2005, 06:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Football Rules- Why don\'t teams decline this kind of penalty?
Using the holiday bowl example, you think Oregon suspected the Oklahoma kicker would do worse kicking from the 37 than the 32? If so, given that Oklahoma wanted to take the penalty and is presumably more familiar with their punter's capabilites, can't we question Oregon's judgment?
Even if Oregon doesn't buy into the argument, a number of teams would do the same in Oklahoma's shoes, so why don't these teams who buy into the "more room to punt" argument decline the penalty when on defense?
|
|
#10
12-30-2005, 08:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Football Rules- Why don\'t teams decline this kind of penalty?
[ QUOTE ]
OK football folks, this bothers me but maybe I missing something. Common scenario, it arose in last nights Holiday bowl in the 4th quarter with like 10 minutes left when Oklahoma had the ball on the Oregon 32 facing 4th and 9 up 10 points I think and took a delay of game penalty to give their punter more room to kick. Why didn't Oregon decline the penalty? One obvious answer is they couldn't decline the penalty, but Rule 10, section 1, article 1, subsection (b) of the NCAA football rules states "any panalty may be declined." I assume this rule is the same in the nfl. So is this an etiquitte thing (which sounds like a silly rational to me, the game is about winning), or are a lot of coaches making an error here, or am I missing something? Thanks, J.R. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't read through all the responses, so forgive me if somebody already answered this. The play never happened, so the defense has no option to decline the penalty. Much like an illegal procedure or false start penalty. Those are called before the play starts, and automatically enforced.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
