Packers at 49ers (video)
During a third-and-6 scramble by 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick, a muddled enforcement where the difference was milliseconds wound up being a difference of four points. Packers linebacker Clay Matthews was flagged for a late hit on Kaepernick well after Kaepernick had stepped out of bounds. The two teams engaged in a small scuffle afterward, when the 49ers were hit with unnecessary roughness foul.
Because the Matthews foul was two steps after the ball was dead, the fouls were on the dead-ball side of the ledger, and the proper call is to offset the two fouls and the down counts. That would have given the 49ers a fourth down and a likely field goal situation.
Instead, Bill Leavy and the crew offset and replayed the down. The 49ers took another shot for the end zone, and they scored.
The change in enforcement is clearly defined, but a foul a half-second earlier would have a different enforcement. If the Matthews foul was a live-ball foul with Kaepernick in bounds (a different penalty, of course), and it is paired with the 49ers post-play foul as part of the continuing actions, then the fouls offset at the previous spot. Third down. Literally two steps made the difference on enforcement.
Leavy spoke to a pool reporter after the game.
Pool report interview with Bill Leavy
Q: What happened?
Leavy: On the play where the quarterback went out of bounds and was hit late out of bounds and then there was a subsequent hit by a San Francisco player. The down should have counted. The penalties were both dead ball, and they should have offset at the spot where the runner went out of bounds. And it would have been fourth down.
Q: So, it should have been 4th and 2, then?
Q: Instead of a replay of 3rd and 6?
Image: Fox Sports/NFL
10 thoughts on “Packers-49ers rough play foul enforcement half a second from being right”
A live ball foul and a dead ball foul don’t offsett, they are both enforced however they are both 15 yard penalties in this case so they negate each other.
Tony: Yes, but the live ball personal foul would have resulted in an automatic first down, and I believe it would still be 1st and 10 after the dead ball foul.
Brian – I believe your interpretation of the rule is correct. While the yardage would have been offset, the result of the live play personal foul would have been a 1st down for SF from the spot of the end of the last play.
Penalties by both teams are not combined into a double markoff. This would suggest a half-distance enforcement forward + a 15-yard enforcement backwards for a net of -12 yards against SF. How is that equitable if both teams are assessed a major foul?
You NEVER combine enforcements south of the Canadian border. Fouls by both offset, unless the second foul happens so long after the play is over that it is in “between-downs” territory. But such a scenario is entirely different than the situation presented here.
Comments are closed.