re: what about the back to back unsportsman like conduct penalties?

Jesus Christ is it really that hard to quote the fricking rulebook?

I see one poster did, in part.

Here let me clear it up for y'all.

quote:

---

NCAA Rule 9 – Conduct of Players and Others Subject to the Rules

SECTION 2. Unsportsmanlike Conduct Fouls

ARTICLE 1. Unsportsmanlike Acts

a. Specifically prohibited acts and conduct include:

1. No player, substitute, coach or other person subject to the rules shall...:

4. Any delayed, excessive, prolonged or choreographed act by which a player (or players) attempts to focus attention upon himself (or themselves).

PENALTY –
Live-ball fouls by non-players and all dead-ball fouls: 15 yards from the succeeding spot [S7 and S27].

---

Notice a prohibited Act of a choreographed celebration is in both singular and plural form for the players involved. That means that the choreographed act itself is a single foul. That doesn't mean that every player that participated in the choreographed act will be assessed a penalty separately. If that was the intent of the rule then they wouldn't have written it also in plural form, they would have only written it in singular form so that each player can be assessed a 15-yard penalty separately.

Now I could see it being charged that way if there were two separate choreographed Acts apart from one another after or during the same play. That wasn't the case.

According to the rules, the way the penalty should have been assessed, was a live ball, 15-yard unsportsmanlike for the hit by Devin White which means that Mississippi State retains the ball and marches off 15 yards towards the goal line. Then, another 15-yard unsportsmanlike penalty on a dead ball foul for the singular choreographed Act with multiple players that occurred after the play was blown dead.

The result should have been Mississippi State ball with 30 yards marched off for two penalties. The angry ref instead either fricked up because he doesn't know even the basics of assessing unsportsmanlike conduct penalties or there was intent to March off as many penalties as he could reasonably get away with. Which is what happened.

Nevermind the fact that Devin white, by any reasonable interpretation of the targeting rule, which I studied, did not in fact meet the definition of targeting. In fact, one could argue he didn't even meet the definition of roughing-the-passer either as it was a pretty bang bang play, his momentum was already carrying him forward before the quarterback released the ball and he even look like he made attempts to pull up to minimize impact.