Fair Catch

[Derek Teigen]

I am transitioning to back judge this year and so I am really focusing on some different areas now, one of those being back with the punt returner on scrimmage kicks.  My question is

1. If an R player makes a valid fair catch I understand he is given protection and cannot be tackled or advance the ball.  But what if R muffs the ball or the ball bounces before R possesses the ball? 
a.    can R advance the ball?
b.    can R be contacted by K?

I am trying to understand the significance of 'protection' and how that comes into play.  I hope this makes sense.  thank you.

[BetweenTheLines]

Casebook Pg. 50. 6.5.2 Situation A should answer your questions.

[ilyazhito]

Once a signal is given, no one on team B (R for NFHS folks) can advance the ball after they possess or recover the ball. The fair catch signal means that the return team's player is forfeiting the ability to advance the ball in exchange for the right to catch the ball unimpeded.

[bama_stripes]

Once a signal is given, no one on team B (R for NFHS folks) can advance the ball after they possess or recover the ball. The fair catch signal means that the return team's player is forfeiting the ability to advance the ball in exchange for the right to catch the ball unimpeded.

Actually, no one on either team may advance.  K is only allowed to advance a fumble, which is impossible here.

[ilyazhito]

A (K) cannot advance a scrimmage kick in any scenario where a fair catch signal might be in play. This is because K is only allowed to advance kicks that do not cross the neutral zone. A legal fair catch can only be made on kicks that occur in or beyond the neutral zone.

[VALJ]

A (K) cannot advance a scrimmage kick in any scenario where a fair catch signal might be in play. This is because K is only allowed to advance kicks that do not cross the neutral zone. A legal fair catch can only be made on kicks that occur in or beyond the neutral zone.

K can advance on any kick caught or recovered in or behind the neutral zone, regardless of whether it crosses the LOS or not.  (6-2-3).

[ilyazhito]

A fair catch must be executed in or beyond the neutral zone (6-5-2). K can catch or recover kicks beyond the neutral zone if they were first touched by an R player (6-2-4). I agree that K can advance on a kick caught or recovered in or behind the neutral zone.

 However, if R makes a fair catch signal in the neutral zone, R must be afforded an unimpeded opportunity to make the catch. This constrains K's ability to catch and advance the scrimmage kick in the neutral zone.

In most scenarios, the fair catch will happen beyond the neutral zone, so it is rare that a back judge will have to rule on fair catches in the neutral zone. In that case, it will be the short wing who has to decide on that play.

[sczeebra]

Just to add a tag to this thread. If R chooses to put the ball in play with a snap after the fair catch and then call a timeout and want to kick the ball would this be allowed? Rule citation please.

[dammitbobby]

A fair catch must be executed in or beyond the neutral zone (6-5-2). K can catch or recover kicks beyond the neutral zone if they were first touched by an R player (6-2-4). I agree that K can advance on a kick caught or recovered in or behind the neutral zone.

 However, if R makes a fair catch signal in the neutral zone, R must be afforded an unimpeded opportunity to make the catch. This constrains K's ability to catch and advance the scrimmage kick in the neutral zone.

In most scenarios, the fair catch will happen beyond the neutral zone, so it is rare that a back judge will have to rule on fair catches in the neutral zone. In that case, it will be the short wing who has to decide on that play.

Just to play devil's advocate (not HFHS so I don't know the exact verbiage or details of that rulebook):

4/10 @A40.On a scrimmage kick, K86 shanks the ball high and short and straight ahead.  R45 signals for fair catch 10 yards downfield while running up to field the ball, and is positioned to catch the ball 3 yards behind the NZ at the A37. Big 'ol Bubba K76 impedes R45's attempt to catch the ball by knocking him to the ground while he is trying to make the catch, and makes obvious, intentional contact with the ball. K32 recovers the kick at the A35 and advances the ball to the EZ.

Ruling?

[sczeebra]

TD.

[dammitbobby]

Doesn't the FC signal negate the possibility of the ball being advanced by either team?

[sczeebra]

Not according to the definition. 2-9-1.

[ncwingman]

Just to play devil's advocate (not HFHS so I don't know the exact verbiage or details of that rulebook):

4/10 @A40.On a scrimmage kick, K86 shanks the ball high and short and straight ahead.  R45 signals for fair catch 10 yards downfield while running up to field the ball, and is positioned to catch the ball 3 yards behind the NZ at the A37. Big 'ol Bubba K76 impedes R45's attempt to catch the ball by knocking him to the ground while he is trying to make the catch, and makes obvious, intentional contact with the ball. K32 recovers the kick at the A35 and advances the ball to the EZ.

Ruling?

I had to read that one three times, but sczeebra is right. K gained possession of the ball behind the neutral zone, so they are allowed to recover and advance.

Restrictions on advancing the ball are only limited to R after a valid or invalid signal. K is not allowed to advance a kick recovered beyond the neutral zone under normal circumstances, the fair catch signal doesn't affect this.

Unrelated, but it's unclear which player made "obvious, intentional contact with the ball", but it actually doesn't matter. That has no bearing on this play.

[sczeebra]

A more challenging question is; what if R recovers it behind the neutral zone and advances it?

[Ralph Damren]

I once had a coach ask, who had a player whose sole value was his ability was to punt the ball straight up in the air :

(!) Punter will do his thing;
(2) blocking back ( probably also a member ofthe drama club) will start signaling and yelling :"FAIR CATCH,FAIR CATCH ";
(3) after catching the ball,he will strool toward the LOS ,saying: "I'll give the ball to mr. umpire for spotting".
(4) when R players had gone to sleep, the K player would turn his strool into a gallop to paydirt.

My response was : "Ball would become dead after the catch, the unfair act rule (9-9-1) would apply, if 4th down the ball would be R's  and you, coach, would be charged a USC".

His response couldn't be printed here, but I didn't hit him with a 'off to the bus' 2nd USC. I did mention he could have his punter kick the ball straight up.

He just grunted.

[dammitbobby]

I thought yall all used K and R for kicking play scenarios, not A and B.

Actually, no one on either team may advance.  K is only allowed to advance a fumble, which is impossible here.

So this statement is what got me to thinking about this, because it seems to be in conflict (as I understand it, without having an NFHS rulebook to reference.)

If R's FC signal negates any possibility of a return by R, even if caught/recovered behind the NZ, why doesn't the same restriction apply to K? Is the FC signal ignored, if recovered by R behind the NZ? (I don't think so, just wondering out loud.)

It just seems a bit unbalanced that R has no chance to advance the ball and K does... I can't think of any other scenario where restrictions like this apply to one team but not the other.

[Ralph Damren]

I thought yall all used K and R for kicking play scenarios, not A and B.

So this statement is what got me to thinking about this, because it seems to be in conflict (as I understand it, without having an NFHS rulebook to reference.)

If R's FC signal negates any possibility of a return by R, even if caught/recovered behind the NZ, why doesn't the same restriction apply to K? Is the FC signal ignored, if recovered by R behind the NZ? (I don't think so, just wondering out loud.)

It just seems a bit unbalanced that R has no chance to advance the ball and K does... I can't think of any other scenario where restrictions like this apply to one team but not the other.

R's signal for FC tells K "We'll take the ball w/o any return. If R muffs the FC, R can recover BUT not advance. K can recover but can't advance a muff unless the ball has bounced behind the LOS, where they can advance. The fair catch was called by R, which restricts R from advancing.

[ncwingman]

A more challenging question is; what if R recovers it behind the neutral zone and advances it?

Since a player on R made a fair catch signal, they can recover, but not advance. However, it is not a "fair catch".

Here's another good study question for your rules clinics this year: During a scrimmage kick, R88 signals for a fair catch and a) completes the catch or b) has the ball hit the ground before recovery. How are situations A and B different? Meaning, what rules apply or options does R have after the fair catch that don't apply in situation B? The obvious albatross is that R couldn't elect to put the ball in play with a free kick in B, but what else is more likely to apply?

[Ralph Damren]

Since a player on R made a fair catch signal, they can recover, but not advance. However, it is not a "fair catch".

Here's another good study question for your rules clinics this year: During a scrimmage kick, R88 signals for a fair catch and a) completes the catch or b) has the ball hit the ground before recovery. How are situations A and B different? Meaning, what rules apply or options does R have after the fair catch that don't apply in situation B? The obvious albatross is that R couldn't elect to put the ball in play with a free kick in B, but what else is more likely to apply?

The choice of where to spot the ball. We usually spot it in the middle, like we do on PATs, with the captain having the option to request it moved.

[Derek Teigen]

Before each punt I will remind myself that ANY valid fair catch prevents ANY team from advancing the ball once the ball has been possessed and that we will blow the play dead when anybody gains possession.

[sczeebra]

Let's revisit the case when the ball does not cross the NZ or is blown back behind it. It is my understanding that no matter where the signal is given (either beyond or behind the NZ) if the ball is behind the NZ, K is not restricted from contacting R in an effort to gain possession. If this is true why does R have to forfeit his right to advance while receiving zero protection from being contacted. I would say any ball caught or recovered behind the NZ can be advanced by either team.

[Ralph Damren]

Let's revisit the case when the ball does not cross the NZ or is blown back behind it. It is my understanding that no matter where the signal is given (either beyond or behind the NZ) if the ball is behind the NZ, K is not restricted from contacting R in an effort to gain possession. If this is true why does R have to forfeit his right to advance while receiving zero protection from being contacted. I would say any ball caught or recovered behind the NZ can be advanced by either team.

6-5-5 states :"No reciever may advance the ball after a valid or invalid fair-catch signal hs been given by any R player." The only situation I could dream of, where R could advance is if:
(1)  fair catch signal given;
(2)  ball goes thru R1's hands and bounces behind LOS;
(3)  ball fielded behind LOS by K and advanced, only to fumble;
(4)  if R then recovered fumble, they could advance as COP rules would apply.

This coming Monday we Mainers will see a full eclipse of the sun. Last one in Maine was 1963. I will have seen two. That's two more than the above mentioned play that I've never seen. 

[sczeebra]

We all love ya butts! The conditions are not met as per the definition in 2-9-1. IMHO since 6-5-5 covers section 5 "Fair Catch" the definition of said section needs to be met. In the spirit of the game I could not see a situation where R gets clocked and somehow catches the ball and we tell him now he can't run with it.

[dammitbobby]

Let's revisit the case when the ball does not cross the NZ or is blown back behind it. It is my understanding that no matter where the signal is given (either beyond or behind the NZ) if the ball is behind the NZ, K is not restricted from contacting R in an effort to gain possession. If this is true why does R have to forfeit his right to advance while receiving zero protection from being contacted. I would say any ball caught or recovered behind the NZ can be advanced by either team.

This is moreso what I was driving at - i know the rule (NCAA is similar) but I don't understand the logic behind it for this very specific case. The rules also appear to be in conflict - FC rules say R can't advance, but scrimmage kick rules say if they catch/recover behind the NZ, both teams can advance. Usually in situations like these, we see a 'if not in conflict with other rules' statement. I don't see anything that says FC rules trump scrimmage kick rule in this situation.

[AlUpstateNY]

This is moreso what I was driving at - i know the rule (NCAA is similar) but I don't understand the logic behind it for this very specific case. The rules also appear to be in conflict - FC rules say R can't advance, but scrimmage kick rules say if they catch/recover behind the NZ, both teams can advance. Usually in situations like these, we see a 'if not in conflict with other rules' statement. I don't see anything that says FC rules trump scrimmage kick rule in this situation.

NFHS 6.5.2 situation B: Since "K" may catch or recover a scrimmage kick, in or behind  the NZ & advance, the action  (in "a" or "b") is legal.