Roughing the Kicker

[JasonTX]

Here is another video from Rom Gilbert's page.  This is a challenging play to officiate.  What is your view of this?

[yt=425,350]b1AMjGDMPbo[/yt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1AMjGDMPbo

[Kalle]

Well, he recovers the snap and immediately kicks it, so that speaks for the protection. But, he's sideways when he kicks, which would indicate a potential run. I think I'd prefer to have this flagged, but might personally pass on the flag in a real game.

[TXMike]

Way to be definitive there and stake out a position!!  You qualify to be a US politician.

[wlemonnier]

There is reasonable doubt this kick will be made due to the snap hitting the protector #77 and kicker being forced after the loose ball outside the tackle box.  Not a foul for roughing the kicker nor a UNR foul.  Team A caused the problem, not Team B.  Contact by Team B on the kicker should be deemed legal.

[Atlanta Blue]

Looking cross eyed at a kicker should be a foul.

Breathing on a kicker should be a foul.

Speaking harshly to a kicker should be a foul.

This should have been a felony arrest.

             -Atlanta Blue, Kicking Coach

[Curious]

There is reasonable doubt this kick will be made due to the snap hitting the protector #77 and kicker being forced after the loose ball outside the tackle box.  Not a foul for roughing the kicker nor a UNR foul.  Team A caused the problem, not Team B.  Contact by Team B on the kicker should be deemed legal.

Amen!

By the way, Bill, Congrats!!!!

[NTXRef]

He lost his protection because he is clearly outside of the tackle box.   Look at #50 at the snap and where the kicker ends up.  He is at least 2-3 yards outside of #50 original position.  No flag.

9-1-4-5.  The kicker’s protection under this rule ends:
(b) When he carries the ball outside the tackle box (Rule 2-34) before kicking.

[Osric Pureheart]

Could we just say for the sake of argument that he stayed inside the box and roughing was still possible by rule? 

(I still got nothing unless the punter's been box-kicking like that all day, which is not entirely beyond the realms of possibility if he's from a Rugby Union background.)

[Atlanta Blue]

He lost his protection because he is clearly outside of the tackle box.   Look at #50 at the snap and where the kicker ends up.  He is at least 2-3 yards outside of #50 original position.  No flag.

9-1-4-5.  The kicker’s protection under this rule ends:
(b) When he carries the ball outside the tackle box (Rule 2-34) before kicking.

#50 isn't a tackle, he's a guard.  The "tackle box" extends another 2-3 yards past #50's position, making it close to where the contact took place.

The tackle box is defined as 5 yards on either side of the snapper.  The ball is on the left hash, so the snapper extends another yard or so to the right.  5 yards from that spot is just short of midfield, right about where the contact took place.  You can't use "outside the tackle box" as a reason not to throw the flag.

A kick might not be imminent?  The punter was not holding the ball as a runner, he was extending his arms to drop it.  That's pretty good evidence a kick was imminent.

Add to that the blocker's sole intent at aiming at the kicker's legs and not the ball and this becomes a good call.

[6310 Forever]

Not a foul.  Make this a pass - would we have Roughing the Passer?  No.  Can't penalize good defense.

[JasonTX]

Add to that the blocker's sole intent at aiming at the kicker's legs and not the ball and this becomes a good call.

I was thinking more along the lines that it appeared the "blocker" was moving in to make a tackle on what he thought was going to be a runner and not one that was diving to make a block.  I don't think he knew a kick was going to be made.  The kicker, in this situation needs to convice us that a kick is about to be made.  This is where we have to judge whether or not he "re-established" himself as a kicker.  I don't think the "blocker" saw enough to think a kick was going to be made.

[With_Two_Flakes]

Does the kicker do anything other than recover an errant snap? Does he take off and (9-1-4-a-5-b) carry the ball from inside the tackle box to outside the tackle box and then stop and do a quick kick? Which of AR 9-1-4-VI and AR 9-1-4-VII do you think this play falls into?
I think he simply recovers an errant snap and then kicks it as soon as he is able. It isn't simply about whether he outside the tackle box. He has to get possession inside and then carry it outside (ie start a run). This play doesnt look like that. Watching this play I have little doubt a kick will be made. I believe the spirit of 9-1-4 says he still gets the kicker protection.

[TXMike]

He was sideways, definitely not in a normal punting position.   Rock his world!

[chymechowder]

Surprised so many people are saying this isn't a foul.  Total roughing in my opinion.  

Bad snap. Punter bobbles it. Punter gains control and immediately kicks it.

Nothing in that sequence suggests that the kicker's protection should have ended.

He's facing sideways, but so what?  Rugby style punters face sideways; so long as they dont carry the ball outside the tacklebox, they don't lose their protection.

Bad snaps, high snaps, muffed snaps, etc. are double edged swords for team B.  Yes, their chances of blocking the punt--or tackling the punter before he punts the ball--increase. But it's a big risk/reward. Because if they whiff on the block, there's an increased chance that they'll rough.

[Kalle]

Way to be definitive there and stake out a position!!  You qualify to be a US politician.

Unfortunately I don't always make the call on the field I'd like myself to make

[sj]

I have a no call. The kicker carries the ball outside the tackle box so protection ends. The center is snapping the ball from the hash and the middle of the field is 6 yards and a couple of feet from the hash which is where the kicker kicks the ball from.

[Amir]

For me, his body positioning isn't a problem as he is still in a position to make a half-decent kick.

However, the key is where he kicks it in relation to where he recovers it. He only has to move a yard or two to his right to pick it up (i.e. still inside the tackle box), then he carries it laterally until he's almost at the other hash before kicking it. As far as I'm concerned there's no foul... but that's only after watching the video a few times. If that happened to me on the field I get the feeling I'd probably end up flagging it, but that's mostly down to my inexperience in that position (2 games).

[NVFOA_Ump]

I've got no problem with the call.  Ball is "dropped" for the kick when B player is still 4-5 yards away and still has plenty of time to change his path, and the ball is kicked and on it's way when he's still 2-3 yards away and the kicker is on his way back down after the kick.  The "tackle box" issue is close so I'm going with the "he's still in the box" so that's not a factor in my mind.  No downgrade on the call here IMO.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[James]

I don't see him re-establishing himself as a kicker. He is bobbling the ball around, and immediately drops it while still running towards the sideline.

From the angle of the D player, I don't think he could have even seen it being dropped - I think he was going for a tackle.

[Etref]

I don't see him re-establishing himself as a kicker. He is bobbling the ball around, and immediately drops it while still running towards the sideline.

From the angle of the D player, I don't think he could have even seen it being dropped - I think he was going for a tackle.

   HE KICKED THE BALL. What else does he have to do to "establish" himself as a kicker? The ball is clearly gone when the rusher makes his move.   

[mccormicw]

1st picture represents the point when I felt the kicker looked like he was going to kick the ball.  2nd picture represents the point when I felt the defender was committed to tackling the kicker.  3rd picture shows the ball about a foot off of the kickers foot.  IMO the defender should have known a kick was imminent and at least pulled up.  He made no effort to avoid contact.  It was close but I support the flag.  I would have also supported taking a pass on the flag.  I had to look at the video several times in order to make a determination and none of us have that luxury on the field. 

[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]

[JasonTX]

   HE KICKED THE BALL. What else does he have to do to "establish" himself as a kicker? The ball is clearly gone when the rusher makes his move.  

A typical punter will receive the snap, adjust the ball, drop the ball, then kick the ball.  He makes it well obvious that he is going to kick it.

In this play, the snap was bad, he muffed the ball to an area that may have been outside the tackle box.  The rules allow for the ball to be muffed to outside the tackle backbox, and protection extended as long as he re-establishes himself.  In my opinion to do that he will need to go through the motions just as a "typical punter" would.  This kid had just barely recovered the ball and then immediately kicked it.  I don't think he made it well obvious that he was going to kick it.  Whichever decision you make on this play I would hope it would be supported and no downgrade regardless of flagging or not flagging it.

[TxSkyBolt]

1st picture represents the point when I felt the kicker looked like he was going to kick the ball.  2nd picture represents the point when I felt the defender was committed to tackling the kicker.  3rd picture shows the ball about a foot off of the kickers foot.  IMO the defender should have known a kick was imminent and at least pulled up.  He made no effort to avoid contact.  It was close but I support the flag.  I would have also supported taking a pass on the flag.  I had to look at the video several times in order to make a determination and none of us have that luxury on the field. 

Did you notice the time stamps in your photos?  The entire action took less than a second....not much reaction time for a defender.

[Diablo]

   HE KICKED THE BALL. What else does he have to do to "establish" himself as a kicker? The ball is clearly gone when the rusher makes his move.   

While I agree, if the player does not kick the ball, there can not be a roughing/running foul.  But, the converse is not always true.  Just because a player kicks the ball, he is not automatically granted protection from roughing/running into.
Example:  Third and 15 from the A-4.  With the QB under center, the snap goes directly to the tailback.  The tailback kicks the ball, immediately after which he is tackled via his plant leg.

[mccormicw]

1st picture represents the point when I felt the kicker looked like he was going to kick the ball.  2nd picture represents the point when I felt the defender was committed to tackling the kicker.  3rd picture shows the ball about a foot off of the kickers foot.  IMO the defender should have known a kick was imminent and at least pulled up.  He made no effort to avoid contact.  It was close but I support the flag.  I would have also supported taking a pass on the flag.  I had to look at the video several times in order to make a determination and none of us have that luxury on the field. 

Did you notice the time stamps in your photos?  The entire action took less than a second....not much reaction time for a defender.

I agree there wasn't much time.  In fact, the only reason I even considered the contact deserving of a penalty on the defender was he shouldn't have been surprised when the ball was kicked.