Extra periods and FG attempt

[CD]

This should be a simple question but a few of us have been discussing it and have two differing opinions, so I wanted to get your input.

Extra period.  A didn't score so it's still tied with B having its series.  2/G B3.  B attempts a FG and it's blocked behind the LOS and goes OOB at B7.

I found AR 3-1-3-V which seems to say that it's still B's ball and they can keep trying to score, since they still had 2 down to try to score.  But given that it's a fumble instead of a recovery, as it was stated the AR, does that make a difference?  This is what we're debating.

[Diablo]

Any time a scrimmage kick, e.g. field goal attempt, goes OB, the ball belongs to Team B (receiving team).  During an extra period, that translates to the series is over.  In your play, go to next EP.

[Kalle]

Rule reference is 6-3-7.

[copedaddy]

But the ball never crosses the NZ so there is no kick, since it is 2nd down and the ball goes out of bounds on the 7 behind the NZ, shouldn't the series continue?

[Kalle]

But the ball never crosses the NZ so there is no kick, since it is 2nd down and the ball goes out of bounds on the 7 behind the NZ, shouldn't the series continue?

Do not fall into the old fallacy that "there is no kick if it does not cross the neutral zone." That is wrong. Some rules do change depending on if the kick crosses the neutral zone but rule 6-3-7 does not.

Rule reads "If a scrimmage kick goes out of bound between the goal lines...", not "If a scrimmage kick goes out of bounds beyond the line of scrimmage and between the goal lines..."

[NVFOA_Ump]

Do not fall into the old fallacy that "there is no kick if it does not cross the neutral zone." That is wrong.

Where do we even get the idea that "there is no kick if it does not cross the neutral zone."?  Where does "the old fallacy" come from and why does it keep coming up?

[copedaddy]

Lets change the situation a little. Same as before but the ball does not go out of bounds and is recovered by team A on the 7 yard line.

[RunRickyRun]

Lets change the situation a little. Same as before but the ball does not go out of bounds and is recovered by team A on the 7 yard line.

3/G B7

The kick never crossed NZ so no change in continuity of downs.  However, simultaneous possession at the 7 would be shut down and awarded to team B - end of 'inning.'

[copedaddy]

This is what I was looking for, sorry for the play, but I have some doubting Thomas' that would not believe me. And I have been hearing the kick and NZ crap for over 30 years, maybe it used to be that way, but it always seems to raise its ugly head every year.

[JasonTX]

This is what I was looking for, sorry for the play, but I have some doubting Thomas' that would not believe me. And I have been hearing the kick and NZ crap for over 30 years, maybe it used to be that way, but it always seems to raise its ugly head every year.

Think of the "there isn't no kick unless it crosses the NZ" like this.  If that were true the you couldn't have roughing the kicker since there isn't a kicker until there is a kick and blocking below the waist would be legal since "there wasn't a kick".

But, the rules clearly state that when the foot legally contacts the leather, we have a kick, regardless if it's behind or beyond the NZ.