Jumping over the guard

[Stinterp]

Kick try for point after touchdown.  Team K is in scrimmage kick formation,  all 5 linemen are in a 3 point stance with their hand on the ground.  Linebacker times the snap and jumps over the offensive guard, who is still in his stance, and blocks the kick?    Any fouls here?

[CalhounLJ]

Hurdling comes to mind ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stinterp]

The linemen have a hand on the ground.....can't be hurdling

[AlUpstateNY]

The linemen have a hand on the ground.....can't be hurdling

Not according to NFHS 2-22:"Hurdling is an attempt by a player to jump (hurdle) with one or both feet foremost over an opponent who is contacting the ground with no part of his body except one or both feet.".  "Hands" are irrelevant.

[BIG DON]

NFHS 2-22:"Hurdling is an attempt by a player to jump (hurdle) with one or both feet foremost over an opponent who is contacting the ground with no part of his body except one or both feet.".  "Hands" are irrelevant, the hands are relevant here as they are in contact with the ground so no hurdling here.

NFHS does not have a foul for leaping ( NCAA does have a leaping foul)

However you could sill have other fouls here depending on contact if the LB had made contact with the crown of his helmet or made contact above the shoulder pads and to the helmet of the opponent then you would have a PF with a possible ejection 

[FLAHL]

I’ve got a foul for hurdling every time.  Did the linebacker encroach?  If not, then we’re saying the Guard simply stayed in his 3 point stance at the snap.  Didn’t he pick up his hand and move to block somebody?  Was that LB so quick that he could hurdle the guard before the guard lifted his hand even 1 inch?  And he could do this legally, without encroaching?  I don’t buy it. This is a safety issue and I’m flagging it every time I see it. If we flag it every time, coaches will stop their players from trying to do it.

This reminds me of the argument that the nose tackle is so quick that he can hit the ball after it’s snapped but before it gets to the QBs hands. We now have a rule that says this is illegal. We need something similar here.

[SouthGARef]

I’ve got a foul for hurdling every time.  Did the linebacker encroach?  If not, then we’re saying the Guard simply stayed in his 3 point stance at the snap.  Didn’t he pick up his hand and move to block somebody?  Was that LB so quick that he could hurdle the guard before the guard lifted his hand even 1 inch?  And he could do this legally, without encroaching?  I don’t buy it. This is a safety issue and I’m flagging it every time I see it. If we flag it every time, coaches will stop their players from trying to do it.

This reminds me of the argument that the nose tackle is so quick that he can hit the ball after it’s snapped but before it gets to the QBs hands. We now have a rule that says this is illegal. We need something similar here.

Quoting for truthiness.

[CalhounLJ]

I’ve got a foul for hurdling every time.  Did the linebacker encroach?  If not, then we’re saying the Guard simply stayed in his 3 point stance at the snap.  Didn’t he pick up his hand and move to block somebody?  Was that LB so quick that he could hurdle the guard before the guard lifted his hand even 1 inch?  And he could do this legally, without encroaching?  I don’t buy it. This is a safety issue and I’m flagging it every time I see it. If we flag it every time, coaches will stop their players from trying to do it.

This reminds me of the argument that the nose tackle is so quick that he can hit the ball after it’s snapped but before it gets to the QBs hands. We now have a rule that says this is illegal. We need something similar here.

+1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SCline]

I’ve got a foul for hurdling every time.  Did the linebacker encroach?  If not, then we’re saying the Guard simply stayed in his 3 point stance at the snap.  Didn’t he pick up his hand and move to block somebody?  Was that LB so quick that he could hurdle the guard before the guard lifted his hand even 1 inch?  And he could do this legally, without encroaching?  I don’t buy it. This is a safety issue and I’m flagging it every time I see it. If we flag it every time, coaches will stop their players from trying to do it.

This reminds me of the argument that the nose tackle is so quick that he can hit the ball after it’s snapped but before it gets to the QBs hands. We now have a rule that says this is illegal. We need something similar here.

+1 more

[prab]

I’ve got a foul for hurdling every time. 

Disagree completely!

OP clearly states that O linemen start in and maintain a 3 point stance.  By definition this eliminates hurdling.  You have changed the OP and assumed that the O lineman in question must have raised his hand before the leap.  You have provided an answer to a question that was not asked.  Two different scenarios!

[CalhounLJ]

Disagree completely!

OP clearly states that O linemen start in and maintain a 3 point stance.  By definition this eliminates hurdling.  You have changed the OP and assumed that the O lineman in question must have raised his hand before the leap.  You have provided an answer to a question that was not asked.  Two different scenarios!

I disagree. I believe he has provided a common sense application according to the intent of the rule to a highly improbable and nonsensical, theoretical situation. While the technical wording of the rule may exclude this specific situation, the intent of the hurdling rule is clear- to prevent a knee-head collision. The fact that A may or may not have his hand on the ground does nothing to lessen that danger.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bama_stripes]

This is no less a safety issue than hurdling a player who is standing upright.  The “no part...” exception is mainly to allow a ball carrier to jump over a prone (or almost prone) player without penalty.

 

[markrischard]

Since I know what the rule book says, I'd have a hard time throwing that flag. No rule book or case book support for the call.

[CalhounLJ]

Well I guess if Bubba stays in his 3 point stance at the snap he needs kicked in the head. 🧐


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jason]

I agree that is sounds fishy for the guard to stay in a 3-pt stance, but IF he does, then that eliminates hurdling by rule.

[Ralph Damren]

A few years back, when the Patriots were a good team , on Monday night game; the loyal opposition lined up for a field goal when:

(1) A defender ,with a running start, hurdled the snapper and blocked the kick- it was later learned that said player also a high-hurdle champ at some level;

(2) I believe the NFL has since outlawed such an act;

(3) I KNOW that my phone rang off the hook the following morning from coaches asking : "Can we do that,too??"

(4) My response was : " NO, it's a dangerous act and I would call it hurdling."

(5) They agreed.

If a player hurdled an opponent that is late in rising from his 3-point stance, I would still consider it hurdling as it is a safety issue. A few years ago there was a proposal to remove hurdling as a foul. The NFHS has a staff doctor and he showed us a video of failed hurdling attempts, where a hurdler either landed on his head or kicked the hurdled player in the head with injury resulting. IMHO, safety is the most important part of our high school game and deserves to get the benefit of doubt.

[5050pete]

First time poster. Wouldn't this rule apply 9-4-3e, see also casebook 9-4-3 situation E
ART. 3 . . . No player or nonplayer shall:

a. Swing the foot, shin or knee into an opponent, nor extend the knee to meet a blocker.

b. Charge into or throw an opponent to the ground after he is obviously out of the play, or after the ball is clearly dead either in or out of bounds.

c. Pile on any player who is lying on the ground.

d. Hurdle an opponent.

e. Position himself on the shoulders or body of a teammate or opponent to gain an advantage.

f. Throw a helmet to trip an opponent.

g. Make any other contact with an opponent, including a defenseless player, which is deemed unnecessary or excessive and which incites roughness.

h. Grasp an opponent’s face mask, any edge of a helmet opening, chin strap, or a tooth and mouth protector attached to the face mask and twist, turn or pull the face mask, helmet opening, chin strap or a tooth and mouth protector attached to the face mask; or incidentally grasp an opponent’s face mask, helmet opening, chin strap or a tooth and mouth protector attached to the face mask.

i. Initiate illegal helmet contact. (butt block, face tackle or spear)

NOTE: Illegal helmet contact may be judged by the game official a flagrant act. Acts that may be judged to be flagrant include, but are not limited to:

1. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent lying on the ground,

2. Illegal helmet contact against an opponent being held up by other players, and/or

3. Illegal helmet-to-helmet contact against a defenseless opponent.

j. Strike an opponent with his fist, locked hands, forearm or elbow, nor kick or knee him.

k. Grab the inside back or side collar of either the shoulder pads or the jersey of the runner and subsequently pull (backward or sideward) that opponent to the ground (Horse-collar), even if possession is lost. The horse-collar foul is enforced as a live-ball foul.

l. Initiate contact with an opposing player whose helmet has come completely off.

m. Target an opponent.

n. Execute a blindside block outside of the free-blocking zone with forceful contact unless initiated with open hands.
 

[CalhounLJ]

Not really because in the OP the poster never said the jumper touched the linemen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ralph Damren]

Welcome ,5050pete, to the forum. We hope you find it both enjoyable and informative. 9-4-3e is basically aimed at a player climbing onto a teammate's back (or opponent's - although few opponents would be allowing) in an effort to block a kick or pass. Thank you for your research, though. 

[refjeff]

I disagree. I believe he has provided a common sense application according to the intent of the rule to a highly improbable and nonsensical, theoretical situation. While the technical wording of the rule may exclude this specific situation, the intent of the hurdling rule is clear- to prevent a knee-head collision. The fact that A may or may not have his hand on the ground does nothing to lessen that danger.

We called a foul on a runner that hurdled a potential tackler that had his knee on the ground.  While the technical wording of the rule may exclude this specific situation, the intent of the hurdling rule is clear- to prevent a knee-head collision. The fact that B may or may have had his knee on the ground does nothing to lessen that danger.

[Stinterp]

I don't think we as officials should call a foul that is not a foul by rule. That is a very slippery slope.  What if the defender had 2 knees on the ground, what if he was lying on the ground, are you still going to call hurdling?  The safety issue is still there, the knee can still hit the defenders helmet, but these are not, BY RULE, fouls.   I agree we need to enforce rules not always by book rule in some circumstances, but we need to be very careful in imposing penalties, when no foul is committed.

[HLinNC]

The purpose of hurdling is to eliminate the attempt at jumping over an upright player.  The wording of the rule excepting the fact that some other body part beside one or both feet is factoring in a prone or nearly prone player and is clear intent the Federation is well aware of what they deem a foul.  The Fed has had ample time to revise their definition or adjust the rule in the 25 years I've been calling but has not done so.

I understand the safety issue but given that they have made no attempt to revise the wording of the rule, I agree with those that say this is not a foul as described.

[CalhounLJ]

I agree this scenario doesn't fit the technical definition of hurdling because a hand is another part of the body. I also fail to see the significance of being bent over at the waist with no hand touching, (which I'm assuming everyone would call hurdling if a defensive player jumped over such a player), and a player bent over in the same position with no hand touching. The danger is 100% the same in both situations.

[KWH]

I’ve got a foul for hurdling every time.  Did the linebacker encroach?  If not, then we’re saying the Guard simply stayed in his 3 point stance at the snap.  Didn’t he pick up his hand and move to block somebody?  Was that LB so quick that he could hurdle the guard before the guard lifted his hand even 1 inch?  And he could do this legally, without encroaching?  I don’t buy it. This is a safety issue and I’m flagging it every time I see it. If we flag it every time, coaches will stop their players from trying to do it.

This reminds me of the argument that the nose tackle is so quick that he can hit the ball after it’s snapped but before it gets to the QBs hands. We now have a rule that says this is illegal. We need something similar here.

+1

[js in sc]

I agree this scenario doesn't fit the technical definition of hurdling because a hand is another part of the body. I also fail to see the significance of being bent over at the waist with no hand touching, (which I'm assuming everyone would call hurdling if a defensive player jumped over such a player), and a player bent over in the same position with no hand touching. The danger is 100% the same in both situations.

I would agree 100%.   The implication that one or both feet are on the ground is that the player may be able to stand up and either hurt the hurdler or himself.  The possibility of injury outweighs the literal following of the rule.  It will be much easier to explain to the coaches why I called the foul and did not follow the literal interpretation of the rule, than it would be to explain not calling the foul to an injured player's family or a jury.