clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Labor Day Discussion Question

Although he and I no longer co-host "The Dawg Show" on local cable television, Travis Rice and I continue to talk about college football every chance we get. Actually, come to think of it, we have the same conversations about the sport that we used to have on the show; the only difference is that they're no longer televised.

We were talking about the holding call in the end zone that resulted in a safety for Western Kentucky in Saturday's game in Sanford Stadium. I made the unremarkable point that there is a certain logic to the rule; after all, if the offensive lineman hadn't held, the result would have been a sack in the end zone, so the penalty merely enforces the result that would have occurred had there been no violation of the rules.

In this regard, I observed, the rule is no different from the penalty for intentional grounding, which costs the offending team yardage and the down, essentially effectuating what would have been the outcome anyway.

Trav did not disagree, but he raised a question that warranted sharing with the blogosphere. What he wanted to know was this: "If the penalty for holding in the end zone is a safety, why isn't the penalty for pass interference in the end zone a touchdown?"


Go 'Dawgs!