weird FG play

[dvasques]

We have a field goal formation. Holder and kicker in place.
Snap is good but the holder muffs the ball, which rolls away from him
On his hands and knees, the holder crawls to the ball and:

1 - picks it up and places it down for the kick
2 - picks the ball up and run for the TD
3 - picks the ball up, stands up, get back to the original holding spot, kneels down and puts the ball on the ground

Should this play be killed once the holder, after crawling around, grabbed the ball to put it down for the kick?
Or should we consider the exception on 4-1-3-b valid all the way until someone actually runs the ball?

My understanding of the intent of this rule tells me to let the play run on 1 and 2, and kill it on 3

what say you?

[Arbitrator]

 

In Agreement! 

[Kalle]

Live ball in all three cases. Nowhere in the rules does it say that the holder may not rise from his position and change to another position, especially if there is a player positioned to make a kick at that time.

[Rulesman]

If he has that much time to complete 1 and 3, the defensive rush must be pretty sorry,

[dvasques]

yes... the rush is pretty sorry

thanks for the input guys, I thought live ball but had to be sure

So you gotta have a ball carrier to kill the ball once he goes down on his knees, right?

But how long do you give the holder time to get the ball, kneel down and place it for the kick?

On this other scenario we have a high snap, the holder and kicker run back. Holder grabs the ball, kneels down, place it on the ground for the kicker
(I know... it sound weird and improbable but I have seen this happen...)
Should we kill it once the holder kneels down or let it live for the kick?

[bossman72]

I have a live ball in 1 and 2 and a dead ball in 3.  You can rise to catch a bad snap and come back down.  If that's not the case, then you can't go back down

[dvasques]

so bossman, you'd have the holder becoming a ball carrier and killing the play once he kneels down if he had to move away from his spot to grab the ball on the ground then come back to put it down for the kicker

I think I'd have that too

live ball in 1 and 2 and dead ball in 3

[Legacy Zebra]

If there's anything that supports letting the play go in 1 and 2, I don't see where anything would support killing it in number 3. The exception of 4-1-3-c says that the exception applies when an offensive player "at the snap is in position to kick the ball held for a place kick by a teammate." So to me, if somebody is there at the snap, you either let all three continue, or you kill all three. Bossman, Arbitrator, or anybody else killing number 3, what would you use to support it?

[dvasques]

We all know the reason for the exception... is to allow the holder to be on his knees without killing the play

but the text of 4-1-3-b never says when the exception ends... so, from what I understand, by rule, the holder can grab the snap, start running and the ball will only be dead if he is tackled or runs OB. If he slips and falls, the ball remains live

I know that's not the way it should be so I'm trying to figure out when does a holder of a bad snap becomes a ball carrier who can be down without contact

[Legacy Zebra]

2-27-3-b  says "he remains the holder until no player is in position to make the kick" so the exception would apply as long as there is somebody in position to make a kick. I'm not advocating for letting the holder run around and be able to trip and get back up. But if the exception is there to let a holder keep his knee on the ground to hold the ball for a kick, what's the difference in letting him catch a high snap and come back down, or crawling to recover a snap and then kneeling with it? If there is still somebody there to make a kick, I don't think the rules support killing it.

[dvasques]

Thanks Legacy, I missed 2-27-3-b

[jg-me]

While a healthy debate, I think we are over-analyzing this situation. 4-1-3-b is written to address that the ball is dead when a ball carrier touches the with anything other than his hands or feet. Ergo, the exception applies to an offensive player who already has some part of his body (other than hands or feet) touching the ground as he is in position to receive the snap AND there is a teammate in position to kick the ball at the snap. The exception is also specific that the ball may be kicked, passed or advanced ( i.e. run) by rule. By interpretation the potential holder has been allowed to rise to catch or recover an errant snap as long as he immediately returns to holding the ball on the ground. Nowhere in the rule is the exception extended to include muffed or fumbled loose balls. Once the player starts crawling around chasing a loose ball or starts carrying a caught or recovered ball, the exception does not apply.
  While we usually view rules with the idea that what is not specifically prohibited is therefore legal, the opposite train of thought typically applies to rule exceptions. They quite often tell us something that is allowed in spite of the rule - anything other than what the exception specifically permits is not included.

[Kalle]

Interestingly the relevant rule does not talk about a holder, so the rule 2 definition about the holder does not actually apply.

Even though I don't think the rule supports blowing #3 dead, it is entirely possible that RR would rule that way, as per jg-me's explanation.

[ttown44]

Redding's Study Guide has a section on this.  Page 44 of the 2013-2014 edition.  Reading from this, you would not blow it dead in any of the three scenarios that you mentioned.  The guide states, "The holder may re-establish his position as a holder as long as 1. there has not been a change of team possession; 2. the ball is behind the neutral zone (it doesn't matter if the ball had or hadn't been beyond the neutral zone); 3. a teammate must be in position to kick."  Although common sense would tell us to blow it dead in the third scenario you mentioned, we can fall back on "we didn't write the rule!!"  Live ball in all three situations that you mentioned.

[ttown44]

Specifically, your third scenario does not state that he was running around.  I'd interpret it as there was someone in position to make the kick for the entirety of the play.  Going with what others had said, I would think that if he is running around in the backfield, he is no longer the holder, but now a ball carrier.  In which, I would not think that he could return to being a holder.  Do we think that it has more to do with the position of the kicker rather than the position of the holder?

[Kalle]

Specifically, your third scenario does not state that he was running around.  I'd interpret it as there was someone in position to make the kick for the entirety of the play.  Going with what others had said, I would think that if he is running around in the backfield, he is no longer the holder, but now a ball carrier.  In which, I would not think that he could return to being a holder.  Do we think that it has more to do with the position of the kicker rather than the position of the holder?

A ball carrier can become the passer or the kicker, so why not the holder?