Sorting out the crazy declined face-mask

[FirefightnRick]

Tonight at the banquet I got a chance to ask the coaching staff what on earth happened at LSU on the interception we got that ended in a horrible face-mask call, that we ended up declining, forcing me and everyone around us, including all LSU fans scratching their heads?

We intercepted the ball and immediately a block in the back occured, and was called on North Texas. Aaron Weathers I believe intercepted the ball, took the pick up field and out of bounds on the LSU end of the field and nearly got his neck broke as he was yanked out of bounds to the ground by his face mask. The SEC zebras converge for several minutes then announce both calls, and that NT had declined the personal foul face mask on LSU. Then stated, it was NT's ball 25 yards back up field and behind where the interception occured. They went to the spot of the foul, then marked off 10 yards more against NT. I started to pull my hair out for sure.

As it turned out, the zebra's told our coaching staff in a very confusing manner that someow if North Texas kept the penalty it would result in giving LSU the ball back, stating that the block in the back occured prior to possession recieved from the pick? So our coaches declined the face mask.

I have understood all along that if the block in the back, or as it would have been correctly called "Pass Interferance" would have been offsetting with the face mask, but there wasn't a soul in the stadium that would have seen it that way, Pre-possession pass interferance. It was clearly after the pick so I had always wonderd what in the heck was the call there. The Sunbelt refs were not the only ones to have a down year.

Rick

[Texas Stranger]

Rick, it was done correctly. The situation was offsetting penalties after a change of possession. If both penalties had been enforced, the down would have been replayed, meaning LSU still has possession.

If, however, NT decided to decline the penalty against LSU, there is now only one penalty left, the illegal block during the return against NT. Since there is no incentive for LSU to decline this penalty, they will accept and the NT penalty is enforced from the spot of the foul, and North Texas keeps the ball.

It's not an uncommon situation, the coach of the team that ends up in possession at the end of the play has to make a decision as to whether or not keeping possession "way back there" is preferable to a do-over with the other team having the ball. Note that in the Ark St game, there were offsetting penalties during Quinn's TD punt return. DD decided to accept the penalty against ASU (ASU will of course accept the penalty against NT) and make ASU punt again. He could have chosen to decline here as well, giving NT the ball deep in their own end.

[FirefightnRick]

Rick, it was done correctly.  The situation was offsetting penalties after a change of possession.  If both penalties had been enforced, the down would have been replayed, meaning LSU still has possession.

  If, however, NT decided to decline the penalty against LSU, there is now only one penalty left, the illegal block during the return against NT.  Since there is no incentive for LSU to decline this penalty, they will accept and the NT penalty is enforced from the spot of the foul, and North Texas keeps the ball.

  It's not an uncommon situation, the coach of the team that ends up in possession at the end of the play has to make a decision as to whether or not keeping possession "way back there" is preferable to a do-over with the other team having the ball.  Note that in the Ark St game, there were offsetting penalties during Quinn's TD punt return.  DD decided to accept the penalty against ASU (ASU will of course accept the penalty against NT) and make ASU punt again.  He could have chosen to decline here as well, giving NT the ball deep in their own end.

←

Got it. It just didn't seem correct standing there seeing the ball brought back so far. It felt like the personal foul facemask, which occured out of bounds would have been ruled as a dead-ball foul negating the offsetting, but the whistle wasn't that quick to call him out yet I suppose. Possibly that was what our coaches were argueing over. It cerainly doesn't seem fair, otherwise you can continue to tee off with late hits, yank a face mask or whatever if you see the first foul occur after post-possession, and actually get away with a free foul if the interception is advanced your way from the 1st foul, which they did? The block in the back was incidental at best due to the quick action of the interception and the reciever, and I believe Jamal Branch, collided in a way that it looked as if Jamal might have gotten the back half of the recievers shoulder . But the face mask was really bad and Weathers was lucky he wasn't severely injured.

Rick