scrimmage kick--fg attempt

[skt101]

On a missed fg (scoring attempt) is the succeeding spot the 20 yard line regardless where the kick occurred?
Example, kicking team attempts a fg from the 15 or the 30 yard line and the score attempt is no good. The kick goes through the endzone.

[zebrastripes]

Yes.

[CalhounLJ]

Just remember a field goal attempt is a scrimmage kick that can score. Anything that applies to a punt applies to a field goal attempt. If the attempt is short and rolls out at the 1, it’s R ball at the 1. If it breaks the plane of the end zone and doesn’t score, it’s a touchback at the 20.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[red viking]

Remember to NOT blow the whistle until the ball crosses the goal-line (or until ball is otherwise dead such as going OOB, B recovering and gets tackled, etc). Not a big deal on an extra pt but you CANNOT do this on a FG attempt. Once had a ref blow the whistle as soon as it left the kicker's foot on a game-winning attempt on last play of the game. He was simply adamant that the FG was no good (it landed short of goal line and B recovered and started running with it) and time to move on to OT but a savy coach for team A would have called him out and then imagine if he then makes the field goal. It was the visiting team too. We would have been running for our lives to get out of the stadium.

[Ralph Damren]

….and don't forget the "tack-on" rule on missed field goals = FGA wide-right + K holding = R 1/10 @ R's 30.

[dch]

What about illegal position (K had 5 in backfield) on missed 3rd down field goal.  Is that penalty "tacked on" after the touchback?

[Derek Teigen]

What about illegal position (K had 5 in backfield) on missed 3rd down field goal.  Is that penalty "tacked on" after the touchback?

I think they would have to decline the penalty to take possession.

[CalhounLJ]

What about illegal position (K had 5 in backfield) on missed 3rd down field goal.  Is that penalty "tacked on" after the touchback?

Yes they may tack this penalty on. Any foul by K during a kicking down may be enforced from the succeeding spot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Derek Teigen]

Yes they may tack this penalty on. Any foul by K during a kicking down may be enforced from the succeeding spot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Calhoun, remember this is a 3rd down field goal kick.  Wouldn't the succeeding spot be the previous spot (LOS)?  accept penalty and push them back 5 yards or decline penalty and take the ball at their own 20?

[CalhounLJ]

Calhoun, remember this is a 3rd down field goal kick.  Wouldn't the succeeding spot be the previous spot (LOS)?

No. Once the ball is kicked beyond the los and either touched by R or goes oob or becomes dead the series is over for K. The ball belongs to the team in possession at the end of the down. In this case it belongs to R at the 20 because the kick broke the plane of R’s goal line and failed to score.

If A fumbles the snap or or the kick is blocked behind the line and doesn’t cross the los, it’s fourth down. But otherwise it’s no different than a kick on 4th down.

But to clarify, the succeeding spot option is just that- an option. R can choose to go back to previous spot mark off 5 and replay the down. But the down doesn’t matter. They could do that on 4th down as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ralph Damren]

Regardless of down, with a scrimmage kick you are giving up the ball. The fact of the tack-on is the unintended result of the rule.

[AlUpstateNY]

Here's hoping the Baseball Gods keep Fenway Park dry and playable tonight, so the "better team" can move on.

[NVFOA_Ump]

Wow, Al I didn't realize you're a Red Sox fan!   

[Ralph Damren]

Here's hoping the Baseball Gods keep Fenway Park dry and playable tonight, so the "better team" can move on.

[/FENWAY PARK WAS VERY PLAYABLE AND THE BETTER TEAM (at least last night) DID WIN !b]

[BetweenTheLines]

Where this rule gets the most difficult would be enforcement in OT. Let's say the Home team misses a game winning FG as time runs out with 5 in the backfield. You would need to tell the visiting team that should they win the toss in order for them to take advantage of the rule they will need snap the ball first. Likewise you would have to explain to the home team if they win the toss and elect to go on defense first which is the norm that the visitors will start on the 5 yard line (under regular NFHS rules). Same thing over and over again if its the team who has the ball last trying to tie or win the game in OT. Remember all of that the next time you are in OT.

[Ralph Damren]

Where this rule gets the most difficult would be enforcement in OT. Let's say the Home team misses a game winning FG as time runs out with 5 in the backfield. You would need to tell the visiting team that should they win the toss in order for them to take advantage of the rule they will need snap the ball first. Likewise you would have to explain to the home team if they win the toss and elect to go on defense first which is the norm that the visitors will start on the 5 yard line (under regular NFHS rules). Same thing over and over again if its the team who has the ball last trying to tie or win the game in OT. Remember all of that the next time you are in OT.

Good point, BetweenTheLines, the unintended results of a rule change probably needs some intended tweaking. The author of the change is a sharp guy ( also authored the outlaw of the Oregonian flea flicker) and will probably be on it like a duck on a june bug (ole' Mainer saying).

[CalhounLJ]

Good point, BetweenTheLines, the unintended results of a rule change probably needs some intended tweaking. The author of the change is a sharp guy ( also authored the outlaw of the Oregonian flea flicker) and will probably be on it like a duck on a june bug (ole' Mainer saying).

It most certainly does need some tweaking because the author of the rule is adamant that this foul cannot be carried into overtime. We never did get an official ruling on that did we?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[NVFOA_Ump]

It most certainly does need some tweaking because the author of the rule is adamant that this foul cannot be carried into overtime. We never did get an official ruling on that did we?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

We have been told "unofficially" multiple times that this does not carryover into OT yet I have still not seen anything "official" that clarifies this.  The rules as currently written pretty clearly say that it does carry over and as of right now there is no exceptions that we have seen.

[bama_stripes]

We have been told "unofficially" multiple times that this does not carryover into OT yet I have still not seen anything "official" that clarifies this.  The rules as currently written pretty clearly say that it does carry over and as of right now there is no exceptions that we have seen.

I agree; however, in the the heat of the moment, it’s very likely that I would have a severe case of cranial flatulence and forget that obscure provision.  I can guarantee that no coach ‘round these parts would know differently.

[Ralph Damren]

After further review by the replay official (chatting with the rule's author) 3-3-3a would apply. If R chose to take the tack-on application, they would then have an untimed down. Declining the penalty would then bring on the OT, if needed. Remember, too, the tack-on can't apply if K is next to put the ball in play.

[CalhounLJ]

After further review by the replay official (chatting with the rule's author) 3-3-3a would apply. If R chose to take the tack-on application, they would then have an untimed down. Declining the penalty would then bring on the OT, if needed. Remember, too, the tack-on can't apply if K is next to put the ball in play.

Yes, and not to beat a dead horse, but this interpretation cannot be correct. The tack on is at the succeeding spot, and the succeeding spot on the last play of a tied game is the first play in overtime, not the R20. The definition of succeeding spot prohibits the spot from being the R20.

2-41-ART. 10 ... The Succeeding spot is where the ball would next be snapped or free kicked if a foul had not occurred.

If K does not foul on the last play of a game that is tied, the succeeding spot will always be the first play in overtime.

Can we not admit this basic fundamental?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CalhounLJ]

I understand this is a scoring play I’m about to post, but the comment specifically speaks to the point of the fundamental definition and understanding of succeeding spot:

10.4.5 SITUATION G:

A2 commits an unsportsmanlike dead-ball foul: (a) following a touchdown by A1; or (b) following a successful try.

RULING: In (a), B is given the option of accepting the penalty enforcement on the try or the subsequent kick. In (b), the succeeding spot is the kickoff.

COMMENT: If the try had been the last play of the game and the score was tied, the succeeding spot for enforcement of the penalty for the foul by A2 would be the start of the overtime procedure. If an overtime is not authorized, the foul cannot be penalized because there would be no succeeding spot. (2-15, 2-41, 8-2-4)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ralph Damren]

The key to succeeding spot enforcement on a tack-on is that is a live-ball foul. The Case 10.4.G deals with a dead ball foul which is always succeeding spot enforcement and would be carried over to the period/half/ overtime (3-3-4d). Some live ball fouls have succeeding spot enforcement, a:"tack-on" is one ,where an end of run enforcement may not be available as the kick may not have been fielded. KCI also comes to mind. Hope this helps .

[CalhounLJ]

Yes I understand the implications of dead ball vs live ball. But the point I’m making is that to enforce the tack on foul after a scrimmage kick at the R20 we would have to set aside the definition of succeeding spot.

There are better ways to accomplish what the rules committee wants. For example, they could add simple language to the exception to read

EXCEPTION: The basic spot may, at the option of the offended team, be the succeeding spot for fouls by K during a legal free or scrimmage kick down (other than kick catch interference) prior to the end of the kick when K will not be next to put the ball in play AND TIME DOES NOT EXPIRE DURING THE PLAY. If time does expire, the only options for R will be to accept enforcement from the previous spot with an untimed down or decline the penalty.

They already had the wisdom to insert the KCI exception because of what you just posted. Doing the same for end of period fouls is not that big a jump.

IMO, that would be much better than having to create a succeeding spot the rules don’t allow for, or set aside the basic definition of succeeding spot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KWH]

The members I have spoken with do not feel any additional wording is required AND that there is no conflict since we have Rule 3-3-3a with the only exceptions to Rule 3-3-3a listed in 3-3-4b.
Further, since 10-4-2 EXCEPTION is not included in the fouls listed in 3-3-4b, any 10-4-2 EXCEPTION foul occurring during a down in which time in the period expires, if accepted, shall be enforced as an extension of the same period.

I am aware there are those who won't believe this not matter what, so I will make my best attempt to get a Casebook Play added for 2022.
However, Casebook space for plays which occur less often than every third appearance of Haley's Commit are sometimes very difficult to justify!
This one might just be a little easier to sell if I go this route...

SITUATION: With the score tied and the game clock running out in the 4th Period, Team K hustles to get a their Field Goal unit in place.
In their hurry to snap the ball they have two players still moving when the ball is snapped!  The kick sails wide right beyond the end line as time expires during the kick.
RULING: TBA

I believe the ruling on this Illegal Shift play should do it???

Thoughts?


Thoughts?