Author Topic: MSU/ASU field goal leap (Read 5054 times)

BrendanP · « **on:** September 14, 2019, 06:49:24 PM »

Did anyone else catch the leap on the missed field goal by Michigan State? As everyone around me was celebrating, I was sure that was a foul for leaping because he put his hands on his teammates as he went over.

TXMike · « **Reply #1 on:** September 15, 2019, 10:13:14 AM »

The play:

https://youtu.be/ZDArtmFAqnA

Kalle · « **Reply #2 on:** September 15, 2019, 10:44:08 AM »

He uses the opponents for leverage and goes through the gap, so I don't see a foul.

NVFOA_Ump · « **Reply #3 on:** September 15, 2019, 01:16:48 PM »

Quote from: Kalle on September 15, 2019, 10:44:08 AM

He uses the opponents for leverage and goes through the gap, so I don't see a foul.

The criteria for a leaping foul was "fine tuned" in 2018 and required 2 main components:

1. Started from a non-stationary position from behind the line, and
2. Leaps directly over the frame of an opponent

He meets 1 but pretty clearly leaps over the gap and not directly over the frame of an opponent, so IMO he's OK (Ref. 9.1.11.b).

ElvisLives · « **Reply #4 on:** September 15, 2019, 02:03:40 PM »

The 'arguable' part of this play is the "frame of the body" element of leaping. While he wants to move through the gap, in reality, he actually gets directly over one shoulder of the snapper and one shoulder of the guard. He actually contacts the shoulder/helmet of the snapper, eventually falling over the snapper, and knocking the snapper to the ground with him. Contacting arms to the side of the body is OK. But, I'm not sure this much contact to an opponent's shoulders can be simply passed off as in the "gap."

Having said that, this action had absolutely no effect on the kicker, who shanked the crap outta the ball. So, probably a good no-call.

Sonofanump · « **Reply #5 on:** September 15, 2019, 07:03:41 PM »

I did not see the game, could someone elaborate on the previous play of a live ball 12 in formation on offense?

NVFOA_Ump · « **Reply #6 on:** September 15, 2019, 08:23:59 PM »

Michigan State had 10 on/near the line plus holder and kicker. Officials missed the count and threw a late flag after the kick. They then got together and picked up the flag and announced no foul. Replay then stepped in and correctly reinstated the penalty.

Kalle · « **Reply #7 on:** September 16, 2019, 12:48:03 AM »

Quote from: ElvisLives on September 15, 2019, 02:03:40 PM

The 'arguable' part of this play is the "frame of the body" element of leaping.

I agree, and I'd like some guidance on how strictly the frame is supposed to be called here. Is any (non-incidental) contact a foul or are the shoulders a bit more free game then the rest of the body.

BrendanP · « **Reply #8 on:** September 16, 2019, 08:02:28 AM »

Despite our consensus of legal play for going between two players, this happened:

NVFOA_Ump · « **Reply #9 on:** September 16, 2019, 08:28:10 AM »

So as Elvis so aptly pointed out we could use some guidance as to what " …. the frame of the body …." really means from a rules perspective. Now we've got it I believe.

BrendanP · « **Reply #10 on:** September 16, 2019, 11:11:15 AM »

Quote from: NVFOA_Ump on September 16, 2019, 08:28:10 AM

So as Elvis so aptly pointed out we could use some guidance as to what " …. the frame of the body …." really means from a rules perspective. Now we've got it I believe.

Pardon my directness, but the line about “going between two players is not a foul” is now meaningless I guess.

TXMike · « **Reply #11 on:** September 16, 2019, 07:00:34 PM »

No wonder we are not consistent with rulings like this ! It would be great if it now makes RR video and he says no foul. 😁

Magician · « **Reply #12 on:** September 16, 2019, 09:46:12 PM »

The tricky part of this is how do you allow a defender to run through the gap but not leap over the gap. That difference will always be subjective.

bctgp · « **Reply #13 on:** September 17, 2019, 01:39:25 AM »

Do we really think he leaped "directly" over the frame of the body of an opponent? Looks to jump the gap. Note the term "directly" being used here.

ElvisLives · « **Reply #14 on:** September 17, 2019, 01:21:42 PM »

Y'all may be misunderstanding the rule a bit. The word "directly" refers to "...the plane directly above the frame of the body of an opponent." Rather like the plane of the goal line is directly above the goal line, so is the plane of the frame of the player's body. This is as distinguished from being slightly in front of the opponent, or angular from the body. This rule change for 2018 was one of the best changes we've seen in many, many years. Rather than any leaping - even straight up - being a foul, the leaper has to get into the plane that is directly above the opponent. Since the frame of the body is at the "...shoulders or below...", on this play, it is pretty clear that the receiving team player got into the plane of both the snapper and the guard. I can see passing on the action with the guard, since he didn't touch the guard. But he lands on the snapper's left shoulder and contacts the side of the snapper's head as he is trying go over. Contact is not required for there to be a leaping foul. It is an indicator, but it is not required. (That's why I say I can see passing on the action with the guard, since he doesn't make contact with the guard, and he is moving away from the guard's initial position when he began his leap. He probably, technically, enters the guard's plane, but it is negligible enough to discount.)
A 'gap' would be the clear space between two players (exclusive of arms outside the frame of the body). If that clear space is less than the width of the leaping player's body, it is going to be difficult for the leaper to not get into the plane of one or both of the opponents on either side of this 'gap.' If he stays on the ground, he is permitted to try to charge through a 'gap' that is less than the width his body. But, if he tries to leap over a gap that is less than his body width, he is almost sure to get into the plane of one or both opponents.

As in this case.

Robert

centexsports · « **Reply #15 on:** September 17, 2019, 03:35:02 PM »

So how hard is it to say "Any B player not positioned and stationary within 1 yard of the line of scrimmage when the center places his hand(s) on the ball is limited to leaping straight up." Forget gaps, body frame, plane, or any other subjective term.

If this is what the intention of the rule (and I believe it is) then state it plainly.

ref6983 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 17, 2019, 04:06:51 PM »

Quote from: ElvisLives on September 17, 2019, 01:21:42 PM

Y'all may be misunderstanding the rule a bit. The word "directly" refers to "...the plane directly above the frame of the body of an opponent." Rather like the plane of the goal line is directly above the goal line, so is the plane of the frame of the player's body. This is as distinguished from being slightly in front of the opponent, or angular from the body. This rule change for 2018 was one of the best changes we've seen in many, many years. Rather than any leaping - even straight up - being a foul, the leaper has to get into the plane that is directly above the opponent. Since the frame of the body is at the "...shoulders or below...", on this play, it is pretty clear that the receiving team player got into the plane of both the snapper and the guard. I can see passing on the action with the guard, since he didn't touch the guard. But he lands on the snapper's left shoulder and contacts the side of the snapper's head as he is trying go over. Contact is not required for there to be a leaping foul. It is an indicator, but it is not required. (That's why I say I can see passing on the action with the guard, since he doesn't make contact with the guard, and he is moving away from the guard's initial position when he began his leap. He probably, technically, enters the guard's plane, but it is negligible enough to discount.)
A 'gap' would be the clear space between two players (exclusive of arms outside the frame of the body). If that clear space is less than the width of the leaping player's body, it is going to be difficult for the leaper to not get into the plane of one or both of the opponents on either side of this 'gap.' If he stays on the ground, he is permitted to try to charge through a 'gap' that is less than the width his body. But, if he tries to leap over a gap that is less than his body width, he is almost sure to get into the plane of one or both opponents.

As in this case.

Robert

This would be your perfectly reasonable interpretation. There are others. One is simply this: the rule prohibits leaping into the plane directly above the frame of an opponent. I say it's perfectly reasonable to say this player leaped directly into the gap and any body part that may have gotten above the Center was incidental.

The rule is very poorly written and, to the best of my knowledge, there has been zero further guidance since it was published.

NVFOA_Ump · « **Reply #17 on:** September 17, 2019, 05:53:47 PM »

Quote from: ref6983 on September 17, 2019, 04:06:51 PM

This would be your perfectly reasonable interpretation. There are others. One is simply this: the rule prohibits leaping into the plane directly above the frame of an opponent. I say it's perfectly reasonable to say this player leaped directly into the gap and any body part that may have gotten above the Center was incidental.

The rule is very poorly written and, to the best of my knowledge, there has been zero further guidance since it was published.

I would agree. If going over any part of the offensive linemen triggers a flag then the rule as written is pretty useless. No gaps on scoring kicks are going to be wide enough to be legal.

texasH · « **Reply #18 on:** September 18, 2019, 08:33:17 AM »

Here's a novel idea. Trying to get the kicking game out of the game anyway, right? How about this for wording for a rule. "no leaping on FG or Extra Points". Period. 99% of the time it doesn't work anyway. Want to block a kick, go right through the man or have a fast due come off the edge. Rules are complicated enough as is and this is not helping things on a rule, in my opinion, is of very little consequence. Just one man's opinion.

JDM · « **Reply #19 on:** September 18, 2019, 11:50:54 AM »

Quote from: texasH on September 18, 2019, 08:33:17 AM

Here's a novel idea. Trying to get the kicking game out of the game anyway, right? How about this for wording for a rule. "no leaping on FG or Extra Points". Period. 99% of the time it doesn't work anyway. Want to block a kick, go right through the man or have a fast due come off the edge. Rules are complicated enough as is and this is not helping things on a rule, in my opinion, is of very little consequence. Just one man's opinion.

Perhaps they'll ban all low blocks to boot...

Kalle · « **Reply #20 on:** September 18, 2019, 12:34:08 PM »

Maybe just get rid of the one point try (TD is seven points unless team A elects to go for a two point try, then it is six points), and just have the kicker kick a field goal attempt as a place kick (like rugby) with no other players on the field?

bctgp · « **Reply #21 on:** September 18, 2019, 09:45:21 PM »

Check out the attached screenshot. The Team B player appears to leap in the gap. The center and guard are subsequently after the snap to some degree partially pushed under his leap which I think would not result in the leaper jumping directly over the opponent. Therefore, I think the PAC 12 missed the rationale for the foul. I think you can say the player was not stationary within 1-yard of the LOS at the snap. So still a foul but not for leaping "directly" over the frame of the opponents as they reported - that is simply not there.

TXMike · « **Reply #22 on:** September 20, 2019, 10:36:49 AM »

I have been trying to understand why PAC 12 ruled as they did. Something that strikes me is the discussion in the rule about “the gap” is only in the area about blocking a punt . Maybe that means that the intent of the rule as it pertains to FG and trys is that we disregard “gaps”. And as was pointed out above, are there ever really gaps on FG and try attempts?

Morningrise · « **Reply #23 on:** September 23, 2019, 10:52:03 AM »

The leaper's entire leg comes down on the blocker's body as they go to the ground in a heap. It's more visible from the camera behind Team A. I believe this is a hazardous play and the kind of conduct the rule was intended to prevent.