« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: interesting case play  (Read 4956 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ck4597

  • *
  • Posts: 64
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-1
interesting case play
« on: November 16, 2018, 07:17:10 AM »
Case play form our weekly quiz that a few can't agree on, so I will post to what the group says....

4/10 from the K 10 yard line.  Punter K25 fumbles the snap in the EZ.  Seeing a potential recovery by R, K25 kicks the ball off the ground from the EZ.  The ball crosses the LOS and is downed by K56 at the
K22 yard line.

thoughts
Logged

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 5100
  • FAN REACTION: +875/-28
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: interesting case play
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2018, 07:29:26 AM »
You have an illegal kick foul in K's end zone = safety. The status of the illegal kick is what it was prior to the illegal act = fumble. Declining the penalty would give K a new series @ K's 22. IF it had been a blocked punt that had been illegally kicked, the ball's status would have remained a kick, giving R a choice of the safety or the ball at K's 22. IMHO, this would be a situation where you could ask R's captain to take a stroll over to within earshot of R's coach as game situation would certainly have a baring on the decision.
Logged

Offline bbeagle

  • *
  • Posts: 553
  • FAN REACTION: +14/-52
Re: interesting case play
« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2018, 07:55:03 AM »
What can't you agree on? Let's see...

1) It's an illegal kick.
2) Flag on the offense in the end zone.
3) Defense accepting a penalty in the offense's end zone results in a safety.
4) Status of illegal kick was what it was prior to that act - a fumble.
5) Recovery of fumble by K56 at the 22 gives K a first down if the penalty is declined.
6) K never 'downed' the ball, they recovered a fumble. If the play is blown dead there you have an inadvertent whistle.

Is the disagreement over the inadvertent whistle vs. penalty?

Logged

Offline NVFOA_Ump

  • *
  • Posts: 4193
  • FAN REACTION: +107/-351
  • High School (MA & RI)
    • Massachusetts Independent Football Officials Association
Re: interesting case play
« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2018, 07:56:11 AM »
I would at least partly agree with Ralph on the outcome here, but I would think that the original post would have described the loose ball as a muff (failure to control the snap ie. backward pass).  Intentionally kicking a loose ball is always an illegal kick and the enforcement spot is the spot of the foul (in the EZ in this case).  Ball remains live after the "kick" and K "downs" the ball at the K22 (I assume that it was "recovered" by K - can't really be "downed" since it's not a legal kick).  I can't find the wording in the rules or case plays that would clearly cover this situation but the pure result of the play is K in possession of a loose ball beyond the line to gain.  Can we find a rule or case book reference that would allow R to have a new series at the 22 if they decline the penalty enforcement?
Logged
It's easy to get the players, getting 'em to play together, that's the hard part. - Casey Stengel

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 3044
  • FAN REACTION: +141/-1010
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: interesting case play
« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2018, 09:32:15 AM »
Quote from: NVFOA_Ump on November 16, 2018, 07:56:11 AM
I would at least partly agree with Ralph on the outcome here, but I would think that the original post would have described the loose ball as a muff (failure to control the snap ie. backward pass).  Intentionally kicking a loose ball is always an illegal kick and the enforcement spot is the spot of the foul (in the EZ in this case).  Ball remains live after the "kick" and K "downs" the ball at the K22 (I assume that it was "recovered" by K - can't really be "downed" since it's not a legal kick).  I can't find the wording in the rules or case plays that would clearly cover this situation but the pure result of the play is K in possession of a loose ball beyond the line to gain.  Can we find a rule or case book reference that would allow R to have a new series at the 22 if they decline the penalty enforcement?
No because that’s not reality. The rule support is the statement that an illegally kicked ball retains the status it was in before it was kicked, which in this case is a fumble.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4843
  • FAN REACTION: +344/-1000
Re: interesting case play
« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2018, 09:58:15 AM »
Quote from: CalhounLJ on November 16, 2018, 09:32:15 AM
No because that’s not reality. The rule support is the statement that an illegally kicked ball retains the status it was in before it was kicked, which in this case is a fumble.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds like K recovered a fumble BEYOND the LTG, during a play that K was guilty of an illegal kick, in their own EZ.  R can choose to accept the foul, by K, for illegal kick which would result in a safety, or decline the foul and accept the result of the play, which wold give K the ball BEYOND the LTG, 1st &10 for K.
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »