Another foul or no foul

[The Ref Thats Lef]

A great play from Poland to view and vote on



And please post your reasons.

[Atlanta Blue]

2-27-3-b:

A holder is a player who controls the ball on the ground or on a kicking tee.
During a scrimmage-kick play, he remains the holder until no player
is in position to make the kick or, if the ball is kicked, until the kicker has had a
reasonable time to regain his balance.

There doesn't have to be a kick for there to be a holder.  In this case, the holder initially bobbled the ball, but then had a hold of it before he was blasted.

[El Macman]

Before the definition of a holder was changed, this was a no-brainer - no kick, no foul (unless it was a head blow, spearing, etc.). But, under the current definition, it would appear the holder is protected as soon as he holds or controls the ball ON THE GROUND. In that case, what constitutes running into or roughing? What - a normal tackle would be roughing? The defense can't touch him until there is no possibility of a kick, or the kicker has regained his balance?
A normal tackle would NOT be a foul if the potential punter is tackled while stepping to kick the ball. I realize this is a bit of a "catch 22," in that the holder is, indeed, largely defensless. But he is holding/controlling the ball, so he can not possibly have an expectation of not being the object an opponent's attraction. A defender diving to block the kick that contacts the holder before the ball is kicked with contact that ain't otherwise a personal foul ought not to be guilty of anything.

In the video example, I don't believe the ball was held or controlled on the ground before the contact. The contact was not targeting, or othwerwise a personal foul. No foul.

[El Macman]

I went back and took another look at the video. In stop action, the holder may have been controlling the ball after the potential kicker stutter-stepped. This is what I was talking about. At that point the defense has to leave the holder alone? They can't tackle him like any other ball carrier?
The contact was shoulder to shoulder.
For the Rules Committee: Let 'em play, for goodness sake.

[Andrew McCarthy]

If the defense goes to tackle this player, controling the ball on the ground with his knee down, when does the ball become dead?

[Atlanta Blue]

A person controlling the ball on the ground in anticipation of a kick is COMPLETELY protected from all but incidental contact, contact caused by the defense being blocked into him, or contact after the defender has blocked the kick.  There is no time limit, there is no rule that allows the defense to tackle him.  He is different from the kicker in that sense.

Yes, a punter that has not yet kicked the ball is free to be tackled.  A holder is not.  A holder may NOT be tackled as long as he has control of the ball on the ground, and there is anticipation of a kick.

In this film, whether he has control of the ball is a judgment call, and reasonable people might disagree on that given that there is no close up that would give a definitive answer.  But if he does have control of the ball, he is not "fair game" for the defense to tackle him.  He is protected, by rule.  As long as that kicker is in place and a kick could be anticipated, the defense can't tackle the holder.

This defender didn't even pretend he was there to block a kick.  He never extended his arms, he had one goal in mind, and that was to punish the holder.  And that holder could only be tocuhed if he wasn't controlling the ball.

All that being said, this holder bordered on incompetent.  First, he set up with his right leg extended forward.  That's just begging for someone to fall on his leg and snap it.  Secondly, when he didn't cleanly field the snap, there was no fire call, he stayed there in that position trying to regrip the ball.  It looks like he did, which gives him protection, but at that point, the kicker's steps and timing are all messed up, and the kick is going to be a no step punch.  For a try, most kickers could still make a no step punch kick, so the kick is still "anticipated".  But it never should have gotten to this point.  And the wing on the left side, #44, plays matador and opens up to let anyone past him.  He still hasn't put a hand on any defender, he simply turns to watch the devestation.

I understand this is US football in another country, but I expect better from my high school JV players.

[El Macman]

...there is no rule that allows the defense to tackle him.  He is different from the kicker in that sense.

...  A holder may NOT be tackled as long as he has control of the ball on the ground, and there is anticipation of a kick.

A Football League of Their Own
There is no tackling in football. THERE IS NO TACKLING IN FOOTBALL.

[ssombati]

I was the Umpire for that game. Here is a photo gallery from that includes a great series of consecutive shots from that play. The link for the gallery is http://www.am-studio.eu/fotografia-reklamowa-2/fotoreportaze/seahawks/seahawks-gdynia-warsaw-eagles/.  The series of pictures starts from 221.

Hope this helps.

Shawn

[Sonofanump]

This defender didn't even pretend he was there to block a kick.  He never extended his arms, he had one goal in mind, and that was to punish the holder.  And that holder could only be tocuhed if he wasn't controlling the ball.

The B player did not go for the ball.  He went for the head.  I have a foul on this play.