Free kick wrinkle

[Morningrise]

Free kick @ A-35. B11 and B22 are deep to receive the kick. Both make valid fair catch signals, but B22 accidentally bumps into B11, causing B11 to muff the kick at the B-5. The kick rolls into B's end zone, where B22 holds A55 to prevent him from recovering the ball. The ball rolls out the back of the end zone. Ruling?

[ElvisLives]

May seem odd, but this is a previous spot enforcement.  This is still a free kick play, since the ball has not changed team possession, or become dead prior to the foul occurring.  Technically, for free kick plays, the previous spot is the Basic Spot, and, by 3&1, fouls by B are enforced at the Basic Spot.   

A, kickoff, A-45, PC=25, GC=legal touch of kicked ball in field of play (penalty accepted), OR, B, 1/10, B-25, PC=25, GC=snap (penalty declined).

Doubt Team A will let B have the ball at the B-25.  Wouldn't even offer the option.  Obvious they will accept the penalty.

Robert

[Magician]

May seem odd, but this is a previous spot enforcement.  This is still a free kick play, since the ball has not changed team possession, or become dead prior to the foul occurring.  Technically, for free kick plays, the previous spot is the Basic Spot, and, by 3&1, fouls by B are enforced at the Basic Spot.   

A, kickoff, A-45, PC=25, GC=legal touch of kicked ball in field of play (penalty accepted), OR, B, 1/10, B-25, PC=25, GC=snap (penalty declined).

Doubt Team A will let B have the ball at the B-25.  Wouldn't even offer the option.  Obvious they will accept the penalty.

Robert

I don't believe it's that obvious unless they feel strongly they'll be able to pin B inside the 25 on the next kick or they want to try an onside kick from the A45. They could be happy to just have B start on their own 25 and put their defense on the field.

[ElvisLives]

I don't believe it's that obvious unless they feel strongly they'll be able to pin B inside the 25 on the next kick or they want to try an onside kick from the A45. They could be happy to just have B start on their own 25 and put their defense on the field.

Yeah, that's probably better.  I just know how coaches hate to decline penalties, unless they happen on downs where their opponent loses a bunch of yards or is otherwise put at a significant disadvantage.   

[Kalle]

So you are saying that the penalty in 6-5-4 does not apply here? I think it does. The spot of the foul is in team B's end zone so I think the result will be a safety, but I'm willing to listen to arguments on enforcing half the distance from B-25.

[ElvisLives]

So you are saying that the penalty in 6-5-4 does not apply here? I think it does. The spot of the foul is in team B's end zone so I think the result will be a safety, but I'm willing to listen to arguments on enforcing half the distance from B-25.

Sorry - I should have been more clear.  Fouls with Basic Spot enforcement (such as holding) follow the Basic Spot/3 & 1 enforcement protocol.  6-5-4 fouls during a free kick play are enforced, by rule, from the spot of the foul (they are not Basic Spot enforcement fouls).  In the case of a 6-5-4 foul occurring in B's end zone during a free kick play, yes, that specific foul and penalty would yield a safety.

If I were a Team B player, and the choice was to foul or give up a TD, 2 points is better than 6 (7, or 8).

Love it.  The devil is in the details, and this is exactly the type of detail discussion that makes us all better.

Robert

[Morningrise]

In the case of a 6-5-4 foul occurring in B's end zone during a free kick play, yes, that specific foul and penalty would yield a safety.

Boom! Exactly. I thought about writing the question as "a) B11 holds A55 in the end zone, or b) B22 holds A55 in the end zone," but that would have given away that something was tricky.

B11 and B22 both signaled, but only B11 touched the kick. If B11 then commits a foul during the kick, it only carries the usual penalty enforcement. But any foul by B22 also violates 6-5-4. It's two fouls in one, and on a free kick play, those two fouls have very different penalty enforcements. The opponent can choose either one.

[Kalle]

B11 and B22 both signaled, but only B11 touched the kick. If B11 then commits a foul during the kick, it only carries the usual penalty enforcement. But any foul by B22 also violates 6-5-4. It's two fouls in one, and on a free kick play, those two fouls have very different penalty enforcements. The opponent can choose either one.

I actually don't think team A has an option to rekick, the only option is the safety (and B's ball at B-25, which team A will obviously ignore).

[Legacy Zebra]

I disagree. We have a holding foul, that just also happens to be another foul as well. It doesn’t matter, because we should just assume they want the safety, but I believe the previous spot is a valid enforcement spot.

[ElvisLives]

I actually don't think team A has an option to rekick, the only option is the safety (and B's ball at B-25, which team A will obviously ignore).

Concur.  The 6-5-4 foul would trump the 9-3-3 and 9-3-4 fouls.

Robert

[sj]

What if it's A 4/7 @ B48. B11 and B22 are deep to receive the kick. Both make valid fair catch signals, but B22 accidentally bumps into B11, causing B11 to muff the kick at the B-5. The kick rolls into B's end zone, where B22 blocks A55 to prevent him from recovering the ball. The ball rolls out the back of the end zone.

[ElvisLives]

What if it's A 4/7 @ B48. B11 and B22 are deep to receive the kick. Both make valid fair catch signals, but B22 accidentally bumps into B11, causing B11 to muff the kick at the B-5. The kick rolls into B's end zone, where B22 blocks A55 to prevent him from recovering the ball. The ball rolls out the back of the end zone.

Now you’re talking about a scrimmage kick, and that is a whole ‘nuther world.  On a scrimmage kick, that foul becomes a post-scrimmage kick enforcement foul, with enforcement related to the Basic Spot.  In this case, the pure result of the play is a touchback, so the Basic Spot is the B-20.  Applying the 3&1 principal, the spot of foul is behind the Basic Spot, so the penalty is enforced from the spot of the foul.  The penalty would leave the ball in B’s end zone, so the result is a safety.

Robert

[Archie]

Another 2 Cents.....Since the fair catch signaller did not touch the ball, the enforcement for his "holding" should be 15, not 10 yards. 6-5-3-4

[Morningrise]

Concur.  The 6-5-4 foul would trump the 9-3-3 and 9-3-4 fouls.

Interesting, so A does not have choice of enforcement? That seems a little unfair.

FK @ A-35. During an onside kick attempt, B22 a) does, or b) does not signal for a fair catch. B11 muffs the kick. To prevent A55 from recovering the kick, B22 holds A55 at the A-48. B11 recovers the kick while grounded at the 50.

In b), Team A will accept the ten-yard holding penalty and rekick from the A-45.

In a), B22 has done the same illegal holding, but because he signaled for a fair catch, Team A cannot enforce it from the previous spot anymore?

[ElvisLives]

Interesting, so A does not have choice of enforcement? That seems a little unfair.

FK @ A-35. During an onside kick attempt, B22 a) does, or b) does not signal for a fair catch. B11 muffs the kick. To prevent A55 from recovering the kick, B22 holds A55 at the A-48. B11 recovers the kick while grounded at the 50.

In b), Team A will accept the ten-yard holding penalty and rekick from the A-45.

In a), B22 has done the same illegal holding, but because he signaled for a fair catch, Team A cannot enforce it from the previous spot anymore?

Moot for a free kick.  PSK is not a choice on a F/K.  So, they could ONLY enforce a pre-possession 6-5-4 foul at the previous spot.

If this was a scrimmage kick, PSK does apply, and 6-5-4 doesn't give you an option.  6-5-4 "converts" a non-personal foul to a personal foul.

Robert
 

[Legacy Zebra]

Interesting, so A does not have choice of enforcement? That seems a little unfair.

FK @ A-35. During an onside kick attempt, B22 a) does, or b) does not signal for a fair catch. B11 muffs the kick. To prevent A55 from recovering the kick, B22 holds A55 at the A-48. B11 recovers the kick while grounded at the 50.

In b), Team A will accept the ten-yard holding penalty and rekick from the A-45.

In a), B22 has done the same illegal holding, but because he signaled for a fair catch, Team A cannot enforce it from the previous spot anymore?

This is why we should still consider this as two fouls, much like "[foul] with targeting". Team A should be able to decline the 15 yard illegal block and accept the 10 yard holding and rekick.

[ElvisLives]

This is why we should still consider this as two fouls, much like "[foul] with targeting". Team A should be able to decline the 15 yard illegal block and accept the 10 yard holding and rekick.

The rules don’t allow that latitude.  AR 6-5-4-II is clear about that.  B1 illegally uses his hands, which is usually a 10-yard penalty, but the AR supports the rule by telling us that this foul by a signaler that doesn’t touch the ball is a 15-yard penalty.

Robert

[Legacy Zebra]

Not the same situation, in my opinion. The ARs (both I an II) deal with scrimmage kicks where the enforcement doesn't change, only the distance penalized. Whether it's holding or illegal blocking, it's going to be PSK. Team A is obviously going to take the illegal blocking foul because they'd rather penalize 15 instead of 10 yards. This is a free kick where the enforcements would be different. If one action can be two fouls, the offended team should be able to choose which one to enforce based on which is more beneficial to them.

[ElvisLives]

, the offended team should be able to choose which one to enforce based on which is more beneficial to them.

Perhaps they should.  But, the fact that the current rule says “...block or foul...,” means that any foul by such a player is to follow the penalty statement for this rule (6-5-4), so the penalty becomes a personal foul, enforced at the spot of the foul.
I would have no heartburn if they changed the penalty statement to give Team A the choice to penalize as a previous spot enforcement, but that would not follow the ‘modern’ philosophy of not repeating the kickoff (whenever possible) to help reduce total game time.

Robert