Blocked Punt Question

[Bulldog75]

I have a question about a play from yesterday.  Bear with me if it should be obvious: I'm new and learning still.

A punt is blocked and falls at the punters feet.  He picks it up and then pitches it forward.  It hits a Team A ineligible receiver in the back of the legs and falls to the ground.
Ruling: Incomplete pass, Team B possession at the previous spot?  Or was it intentional grounding, Team B possession at the spot where the punter threw it? 


Correct me if any of this is wrong:
The blocked punt that never crossed the neutral zone is a loose ball and can be recovered and advanced by either team. 
The punter after recovering could run with it, pass it, or try to punt it again. 
There is no illegal touching since the ineligible receiver did not intentionally touch the ball.

[TexasProud]

I have a question about a play from yesterday.  Bear with me if it should be obvious: I'm new and learning still.

A punt is blocked and falls at the punters feet.  He picks it up and then pitches it forward.  It hits a Team A ineligible receiver in the back of the legs and falls to the ground.
Ruling: Incomplete pass, Team B possession at the previous spot?  Or was it intentional grounding, Team B possession at the spot where the punter threw it? 


Correct me if any of this is wrong:
The blocked punt that never crossed the neutral zone is a loose ball and can be recovered and advanced by either team. 
The punter after recovering could run with it, pass it, or try to punt it again. 
There is no illegal touching since the ineligible receiver did not intentionally touch the ball.

Great play to learn from and happy that you ask.  Hopefully you're asking to confirm what you looked up and interpret from the rule book.  All of your summaries are accurate and nothing you stated is wrong.  My only comment is related to the possibility of intentional grounding.  That ruling is completely up to the R.  If that's what you rule, so be it but.  But I would be surprised to not see an eligible receiver very near the same lineman the thrown/pitched forward ball contacted.  Certainly not guaranteed but typically you see an eligible number and position player lined up in the backfield who is there to protect the kicker. 

But, again, great job reviewing and asking.

[Bulldog75]

I definitely read through the rulebook before posting.  I knew the punter was allowed to recover the ball and continue play. 

For some reason I had thought you weren't allowed to attempt a second kick, but couldn't find anything about that in the rulebook.  Good to confirm that is allowed.

During the game I had wondered about illegal touching, but later saw in the rulebook that the touching would have to be intentional, which makes sense.

[ElvisLives]

I definitely read through the rulebook before posting.  I knew the punter was allowed to recover the ball and continue play. 

For some reason I had thought you weren't allowed to attempt a second kick, but couldn't find anything about that in the rulebook.  Good to confirm that is allowed.

During the game I had wondered about illegal touching, but later saw in the rulebook that the touching would have to be intentional, which makes sense.

Bulldog, you may not have recognized this yet, but even if the BC advances the ball across the NZ, if he returns in/behind the NZ, he may make a scrimmage kick from there, as well. So, kick is blocked, punter recovers behind the NZ, advances beyond the NZ, then returns behind NZ and kicks it again - all legal.
An A player might receive the snap or hand off, intends to punt, but sees that he won't get the kick away, so he attempts to advance for a first down (or they simply run a fake punt and try to get a first down), but the BC sees he won't be able to get the first, but has crossed the NZ - he may return behind the NZ and kick it.
Happened in the WAC back around 2004 or so. Fake punt, so BC advanced to the about 1/2 yard beyond the NZ, but could see he would not get the additional 5 yards or so that they needed, so he very astutely retreated and was in - but not beyond - the NZ when he kicked the ball.  Team B recovered the bouncing ball, made a short return, and was tackled. B's ball, 1/10. All legal.
However, he would not have been allowed to forward pass the ball. Once the ball has been in possession beyond the NZ, it may not be passed forward. But it may be kicked until possession has changed, or a kick has officially crossed the NZ.

[PeterPaulandMary]

After crossing the NZ, if BC fumbles and the ball rolls behind the neutral zone can a Team A player recover and kick it?

[Kalle]

After crossing the NZ, if BC fumbles and the ball rolls behind the neutral zone can a Team A player recover and kick it?

As long as the team possession has not changed during the down team A may execute any number of scrimmage kicks from behind the LOS during the down (obviously requires that none of the previous scrimmage kicks crossed the NZ). So yes, in your play situation the kick is legal.

[JasonTX]

After crossing the NZ, if BC fumbles and the ball rolls behind the neutral zone can a Team A player recover and kick it?

On 4th down only the player on team A that fumbles the ball may catch or recover the fumble.   Once his teammate gains possession it is dead.