# Goofy rule

Not talking about the coin toss last night. What was up with that

We score. Go for 2. We get to one inch line and we get penalized bc ball comes back to the one. Defence goes offside ball goes to the one. No change
It actually encourages the D to play it real close. If we don't punch it in what's the worse that can happen. Ball at the one. Where it started.

And btw how much clock was eaten up going for that 2 when at that point it really didn't matter

Not sure what the question is but i'll try and clarify.
The 2 point conversion comes from the 3 yard line. Penalty occurred in the endzone so the ball goes to the 1.
The reason the ball cant stay on the 1 inch line is because the D has to line up 1 yard off the ball, you can't have teams lining up a yard deep into the endzone. And the D cant play it "close" - 1 yard off the ball is the goal line, if they're behind it they're good, if they're not behind it theyre offside. Whats the issue?
As for going for 2, its the right decision because if we got it it would have been an 11 point game, If we miss it its a 2 TD game, same if we kick the PAT.

I will respectfully disagree with the play call. Over 9 minutes remaining and we would have to complete two 2 point conversions and a field goal.
As for the yard off ball rule I have always found it silly. Forget the two point conversion and analyze a first second down on the one. If the offense gets to the one inch line why reward the defence and move the ball back to the one. Surely in this day and age a markers of sorts can be put in the end zone between the hash marks as a benchmark for the D.
If under current rules we get to the one inch line two plays in a row we would still be at the one despite gaining 1.9 yards and still would need a yard to score
As I have said. Goofy

I just finished seeing the game, for the second time, (pvr Saturday morning) and one of the notes I made was that the Cats had it first & goal @ the OTT 1-yd. line with 11:21 left in the game. After 2 failed sneaks by Masoli, Banks' run in for the TD, and 2 tries for a 2-pt. conversion, the clock read 8:53. So, while down by 19 pts, they took 2:28 off the clock to come away with 6 pts., from the 1-yd. line! On the telecast I also saw a lot of things, particularly in the shots of the HAM bench, which confirm, for me, that this a very disorganized and divided team -- both amongst the coaching staff, and amongst the players and, I expect, between the two groups as well.

If you think about it at all, the whole "placing of the ball" process in football is, as you say, goofy. On short yardage, the ball carrier can disappear into a mass of humanity, and from that heap, the official places the ball. If it is "forward progress" it can be progress of the ball, progress of the player, or just some speculation by the official of where he thinks the ball and/or the carrier penetrated. How often do you see a QB stopped dead on a sneak, bounce back and then fall forward short and the official mark the ball past the line of scrimmage? Second effort! claims the colour man on TV. And of course, for the goal-line it is the "plane" of the goal line, so a carrier with a good reach could score from the one yard line anyway, with a good jump.
On open field plays, the ball can be marked where some part of the carrier's body touched down, be it his knee or his elbow, but not his hand, especially if he uses his hand for balance, to avoid further contact. Or if his elbow or knee touch, but no opposition player then touches him or "caused" the touch, it doesn't matter. Or if he rolls over another player, but his knee or elbow, or sometimes the ball, don't touch. Or it could be the position the ball touches the ground, unless, sometimes, it is cradled by the carrier, and his knee or elbow don't touch. If a player is 6 feet tall, and can reach out another two feet, that gives the official about 8 feet of judgment, 2 2/3 yards, to mark the spot. Then the chain gang runs out and we find the ball is "inches short" or 'just over".
Absolutely bizarre intellectually, and makes no sense with to-day's technology, but that's the way the game is played, and so far, all the players and most of the fans accept it, and have done so for about a century. And for goodness sakes, we don't want the video replay boondoggle added to the ball placement.

Palmer: I’ve thought the same thing. 2017 and the technology we have yet the spot is a judgement call pretty much every play. When you think of it it makes no sense.

Maybe I've missed a rule change but the convert attempt in the CFL does not take time off the game clock. Please correct me if I'm wrong .

Pat Lynch (the old guy)

The clock does not run during convert attempts in the last three minutes of a half

Article 3 – Time Out Time shall start when the ball is touched following the kickoff at the start of a half, or after a scoring play, and shall continue until the ball is ruled dead and an official signals to the timekeeper that time shall stop for any of the following reasons:
• When a score has been made
• When the ball goes Out of Bounds
• When a forward pass is incomplete
• For the application of penalties
• For player substitution
• For delay caused by player injury
• When time expires at the end of each period
• When the ball becomes dead after the three-minute warning has been given in any half
• When a player or head coach requests a team timeout • For a convert attempt during the last three minutes of a half
• When the Referee deems it necessary to suspend play.

If in any period the ball becomes dead with only a short period of time remaining, the team in possession shall be entitled to one complete play even though that play may extend beyond the normal termination of that period. If a touchdown is scored on the last play of a period, the period shall be extended to include the convert attempt.

Well Pat, I always thought that the convert was a "no time" play also. I guess I had never really looked, except when the clock becomes critical, usually during the last few minutes of tight games, when in fact the clock does stop.

Thanks for the information Grover! As they say on TSN "And now you know!"

I see absolutely nothing "goofy" in your examples above. You just don't have a clean grasp of the concept of the rules on marking. Unless you want to underlay the field with a fine sensor mesh and have a matching transducer at each end of the ball you cannot escape judgement on ball positioning. It is a game NOT a launch of a supply mission to the International Space Station.

Absolutely agree with you 100%, robsawatsky.