Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10
31
Texas Topics / Re: PROP Approved Rules changes - now we wait for the UIL
« Last post by ElvisLives on May 15, 2024, 02:04:32 PM »
UIL 2024 Modification to Exception #52

OK, I know a little more.

Firstly, the 2024 'action' document published by the UIL is not the final Exceptions document. That will probably not be issued until after the actual 2024 NCAA Rules book is released (which should be any time now, I would think).

I have it on good authority that yes, the language in the 'action' document from the UIL is not properly edited, as it relates to a 'snap' and a 'fumble,' as both as defined.  I expect that will be corrected.

As I now understand it, if Team A executes a 'routine' field goal attempt, the UIL does not want 'upright' players of Team B who are positioned within one yard of their LOS at the snap to initiate contact with any opponent. They can rush, but they just can't initiate any significant contact. If they can run through a gap or around an end with anything more than minor contact, they are legal. I also understand that those 'restricted' Team B players will be responsible to avoid contact with Team A, even if a Team A player moves into their path. Let's say a wingback steps toward a 'restricted' edge rusher and blocks him below the waist, we may have offsetting fouls. BBW by offense, UNR by defense.

But a bona fide muff of the snap, or a fumble of the ball (after possession is gained) will eliminate the restriction on Team B players.
A 'bad' snap does not necessarily mean the restriction is eliminated. If the ball reaches the holder without him having to leave his position to recover the ball, and then he is able to place the ball, and the kicker makes the kick, that will work as a routine kick, and the restriction applies. 
If Team B does anything other than continue their attempt to execute a place kick, like a pass or a run, the restriction is eliminated.

Potential holder A11 tries to catch the snap in flight, but bobbles it in hands and against his chest, then completes the catch. That will be a simple, clean catch, for #52 purposes. Restriction applies.
So, what does count as a muff? Not totally sure yet. Maybe if it hits the ground (?). Surely, that would have to qualify. (Yeah, I know - Stop calling you Shirley. :))

How about a fumble?
Potential holder A11 catches the ball, but then fumbles it as he is moving to place the ball for the kick. That's a fumble, and the restriction is eliminated.

The idea is that the defense must be allowed to attempt to recover a ball loose from a muff or a fumble, make a play for a pass, or pursue a Team A ball carrier attempting to advance. But, if the kick is normal and routine, those restricted folks can't initiate contact with a Team A player.

One way for teams to avoid problems is simply have everybody on the line in 3 or 4 point stances. And B players more than 1 yard off their line are not restricted.

Oh. Also, I understand that we will not have to deal with 'game day rosters.'  Although not addressed in the 'action' document, the UIL will not approve that NCAA editorial change for the UIL. Whew!


32
National Federation Discussion / Re: Question about Force after an errant snap.
« Last post by Etref on May 15, 2024, 01:52:27 PM »
A snap is a backward PASS.
33
National Federation Discussion / Question about Force after an errant snap.
« Last post by Fatso on May 15, 2024, 12:48:22 PM »
Reviewing a question from last year where A's snap sails over QB's head. Several players muff the bouncing ball which goes thru A's end zone and over the end line.  Ball was last muffed by team B in the field of play.  What is the result of the play?



Rule 2.13.2 says: Responsibility for forcing the ball from the field of play across a goal line is attributed to the player who carries, snaps, passes, fumbles or kicks the ball, unless a new force is applied to either a kick, fumble or backward pass that has been grounded. 

Am I reading this correctly - a grounded snap is treated differently than a grounded fumble?  What's a good way to remember this?    thx.
34
Would be REALLY SIMPLE to clarify this rule by just using the words INTENTIONAL TOUCHING.  While I agree that understanding and knowing Rule 2 is critical not being clear in the specific rule wording IMHO is a serious omission.
35
Texas Topics / Re: PROP Approved Rules changes - now we wait for the UIL
« Last post by ElvisLives on May 13, 2024, 11:50:54 AM »
Oh, and I see no UIL action on other editorial changes:
1-4-2-d
Player has to report to the referee if he enters the game wearing a number other than that on the "game day roster." WTF is a "game day roster"? Never saw one in my years in FBS, and certainly not in UIL football. By taking no other action, is the UIL accepting this change? Are they going require schools to provide us with an official "game day roster"? What a mess.

12-3-3-d-3 is a Replay rule, and there is no reason not to accept it, for those 12 annual games using replay.

12-3-6-i and j is a Replay rule, and there is no reason not to accept it, for those 12 annual games using replay.

I'll see what I can find out about those.
36
NCAA Discussion / Re: Rules Question on a Punt Play
« Last post by ElvisLives on May 13, 2024, 11:41:45 AM »
Quick question on a scrimmage kick play. 4/10 @ A-30. B1 makes a fair catch at the B-30. A45 is flagged for holding before the kick, and
B52 clips at the B-40 during the kick. What are the options?

A, 4/10, A-30, snap (25), or

10-1-4 Exception 1
B, 1/10, B-15, snap (25)

This is known as the "clean hands" exception. Normally, live-ball fouls by both teams during a down become offsetting fouls, and the down is repeated at the previous spot. However, in this case, Team B had not fouled BEFORE gaining possession (their "hands were clean"); therefore, Team B MAY invoke this rule and refuse offsetting fouls. By doing so, they decline the penalty for Team A's foul, and then Team A has the option to accept or decline the penalty for Team B's foul. Then, the next down is played from the spot where Team B's penalty leaves the ball, with Team B snapping (in this case, following PSK enforcement). (Note: That down could be in an extended period, if time in the 2nd/4th period expired during the previous down.)
I have seen teams elect to accept offsetting fouls, to have the down repeated (for field position or scoring attempt purposes), but those are unusual, if not rare.
While there are technical scenarios where Team A might decline Team B's penalty (after Team B invokes the 'clean hands' exception), they are extremely rare, and I won't get into them, here.
37
NCAA Discussion / Re: Rules Question on a Punt Play
« Last post by Legacy Zebra on May 13, 2024, 11:33:24 AM »
All of the criteria for post scrimmage kick enforcement are met (Team B’s foul was during the kick, the kick crossed the neutral zone, Team B will next put the ball in play, not a successful try, in OT or on a try). So Team A’s foul is treated as if it happened after the change of team possession. That means Team B has the option. They can choose offsetting fouls and replay the down, or they can decline the penalty for Team A’s foul and retain possession after completion of the penalty for their foul. The basic spot for this foul is the PSK spot. The PSK spot for this down is the spot where the fair catch was made. So the basic spot is the B-30 and the spot of the foul is the B-40. Because the basic spot is behind the spot of the foul, the penalty is enforced from the basic spot. The 15 yard penalty for clipping would make it Team B’s Ball, 1/10 @ B-15. Regardless of what Team B chooses, the play clock is at 25 and the game clock starts on the snap.
38
NCAA Discussion / Rules Question on a Punt Play
« Last post by Sturdy6 on May 13, 2024, 11:12:49 AM »
Quick question on a scrimmage kick play. 4/10 @ A-30. B1 makes a fair catch at the B-30. A45 is flagged for holding before the kick, and
B52 clips at the B-40 during the kick. What are the options?
39
Texas Topics / Re: PROP Approved Rules changes - now we wait for the UIL
« Last post by dammitbobby on May 13, 2024, 08:31:07 AM »
Yes, we get the fact that the UIL is trying to get the coaches to put all of their 'rushers' in 3 or 4 point stances. Would that they would. But they won't.

So what problem are they trying to solve here? Wouldn't a rule simply stating that anyone within the confines of the tackle box, +2 or +3 yards, must be in 2 or 3-point stance, if Team A is in a scrimmage kick formation, achieve the same thing, and be much simpler?
40
Texas Topics / Re: PROP Approved Rules changes - now we wait for the UIL
« Last post by ElvisLives on May 13, 2024, 08:27:07 AM »
I guess my brain filled in that gap without noticing that part of the rule was gone.

I did the same regarding the part about a muff/fumble/fake/broken play before the defensive contact. We’re humans with human brains, all far from perfect. My most respected former boss used to say, “He who ain’t screwin’ up ain’t doin’ anything.” Words to live by.

I am still seeking clarification on the various scenarios. And, I want somebody to ‘admit’ that the language “…the snap is muffed or fumbled…” is clearly improper, as written. (A snap can’t be fumbled.)

Will advise when/if I learn more.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10