Author Topic: Blocked Punt - Safety or Touchback  (Read 4404 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline east louis

  • *
  • Posts: 136
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-14
Re: Blocked Punt - Safety or Touchback
« Reply #25 on: May 04, 2018, 08:29:13 AM »
Touchback B60 responsible

Offline Docjoe

  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-0
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocked Punt - Safety or Touchback
« Reply #26 on: May 07, 2018, 12:36:55 PM »
Comes down to the often misunderstood and misapplied force principle.  "R" muffing the kick into the end zone after the kick has hit the ground pretty much speaks for itself.  The problem, however, is for the crew to be sure that this is truly what happened.  I can see this play requiring some discussion for many crews. More often than not, you'll get some heat from one side if not a question or two.   EXCELLENT question posed.  We need reviews like this before the season begins. 

Offline Docjoe

  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-0
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocked Punt - Safety or Touchback
« Reply #27 on: May 07, 2018, 12:42:08 PM »
Sorry!  I didn't mention that the result of the play is a touchback.  My bad!

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3598
  • FAN REACTION: +281/-537
Re: Blocked Punt - Safety or Touchback
« Reply #28 on: May 07, 2018, 01:32:55 PM »
Under the NFHS code, if ANY legal kick (Free or Scrimmage) crosses the receiving team's goal line, without a player (of either team) possessing it, or the ball becoming dead, while not in player possession, the result is a Touchback (NFHS: 8-5-3b)

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 977
  • FAN REACTION: +27/-28
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Blocked Punt - Safety or Touchback
« Reply #29 on: May 08, 2018, 06:36:28 AM »
Under the NFHS code, if ANY legal kick (Free or Scrimmage) crosses the receiving team's goal line, without a player (of either team) possessing it, or the ball becoming dead, while not in player possession, the result is a Touchback (NFHS: 8-5-3b)

True, but I think in this case it’s K’s endzone in play


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 3049
  • FAN REACTION: +381/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocked Punt - Safety or Touchback
« Reply #30 on: May 08, 2018, 08:02:31 AM »
K's end zone is open for bouncing punts. Things to remember from this OP:

** A new force CAN NOT be added until the kick hits the ground...R1 calls for a fair catch @ K's 15 (lousy punt). Kick goes through R1's hands, bounces off his knee before touching the ground, and then bounces off pylon = safety.

** a muff is the touching of a loose ball in attempt to gain possession. Being pushed into the ball, or having a bouncing ball bounce off you is not a muff UNLESS YOU ARE TRYING TO GAIN POSSESSION.

** An added force by R would apply only IF you were SURE the bouncing kick would not have made it to the end zone without it.

WHEN IN DOUBT : Remember K got their punt blocked. Do they deserve a new series at their 20 ?? NOT UNLESS YOU ARE VERY SURE A NEW FORCE BY R WAS THE CAUSE IF PUTTING THE BALL IN THE END ZONE.

WHEN IN DOUBT : If to cheer for the Red Sox or the Yankees during their current series, pick the Red Sox.

Time for some sardine pancakes  :puke: :puke:

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3598
  • FAN REACTION: +281/-537
Re: Blocked Punt - Safety or Touchback
« Reply #31 on: May 08, 2018, 11:51:21 AM »
True, but I think in this case its Ks endzone in play 

It is important to understand whose endzone is being threatened.

Offline Bob M.

  • *
  • Posts: 1054
  • FAN REACTION: +97/-20
Re: Blocked Punt - Safety or Touchback
« Reply #32 on: May 15, 2018, 09:35:11 PM »
REPLY: Everyone wants 'consistency' in our calls, but then the Fed decides to leave this specific rule subject to each official's judgment as to whether a new force has been imparted or not. Wouldn't be surprising if a play such as the one in the OP is viewed by 10 Fed officials would end up with 5 of them ruling TB and 5 ruling safety. Is that where we want to be? Put that same play in front of 10 NCAA officials and you'll have all 10 ruling safety. NCAA has chosen to take judgment out of the play and have objective criteria for determining when a new force (impetus) has been added rather than what the covering official 'feels.' Which 'strategy' is preferable?
Bob M.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3598
  • FAN REACTION: +281/-537
Re: Blocked Punt - Safety or Touchback
« Reply #33 on: May 16, 2018, 09:10:33 AM »
have objective criteria for determining when a new force (impetus) has been added rather than what the covering official 'feels.' Which 'strategy' is preferable? 

Hopefully, there's a HUGE difference between, "what the covering official 'feels.'', and clearly understanding what the actual rule dictates, and being in the proper position to observe what actually happened, to be able to render a proper, and accurate, JUDGMENT.

Often, the job calls for being able (and willing) to make an INSTANT decision, ALONE, on what YOU see and YOUR knowledge and understanding of whatever rule governs the situation YOU'RE looking at, which is why mastering "Mechanics" and UNDERSTANDING Rules should be never ending pursuits.

Initial Judgments can be reviewed and amended,  but aside from instant confirmation, in some circumstances, they usually are not Delayed.

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 793
  • FAN REACTION: +147/-4
Re: Blocked Punt - Safety or Touchback
« Reply #34 on: May 20, 2018, 11:06:02 PM »
REPLY: Everyone wants 'consistency' in our calls, but then the Fed decides to leave this specific rule subject to each official's judgment as to whether a new force has been imparted or not. Wouldn't be surprising if a play such as the one in the OP is viewed by 10 Fed officials would end up with 5 of them ruling TB and 5 ruling safety. Is that where we want to be? Put that same play in front of 10 NCAA officials and you'll have all 10 ruling safety. NCAA has chosen to take judgment out of the play and have objective criteria for determining when a new force (impetus) has been added rather than what the covering official 'feels.' Which 'strategy' is preferable?
Are you referring to the NCAA rule saying the ball has to be at rest before new impetus can be applied? If yes, that's similar to the philosophy we teach here to determine if a new force is applied in NFHS. It helps to take away most of the judgement. The team defending the goal either had their kick blocked or fumbled so why give them the benefit of the doubt if a muff happens to put the ball into their end zone. This gets back to the philosophy of "flawed play." Who has committed a flawed play in this situation.