Scrimmage Kick goes beyond NZ and returns

[Harry]

I wonder what you all think about this play.  This happened in a scrimmage.

The play was a punt which went beyond the NZ, then bounced behind the NZ.  It was not moving when a player of K touched it and walked away. 

The question was whether it should have been blown dead or remained live.  I think we could easily get away with killing it.  Nothing is really going to go wrong there.  But could we and should we have left it alive?

[bama_stripes]

If it's not moving AND no player is making an attempt to gain possession, I'd kill it.

[Magician]

I had this happen in a game a few years ago but the K player "downed" the ball when it came to rest.  I didn't think about it until after I killed it but they could have picked it up and ran with it.  There were losing 70-0 at the time so it wouldn't have mattered but it was a good learning experience for me.

[Wingman]

All any kicking team member has to do is touch a scrimmage kick at rest when it is beyond the NZ to cause the play to end..
That being said, if behind the NZ.. just make sure no player is trying to get at this motionless ball. If so, killing it is the right thing to do. It's just what Rule-4 says to do.

[fbrefga]

As long as no other player (R) was in the area to pick up the ball, I would kill it.  If there are players around after K touches it, I would lay off the whistle.

[golfingref]

Along this same play, may team K punt the ball again, whether it was blocked behind the NZ or if it was kicked beyond and rebounded behind the NZ? I can't find anything in the rule book or case book that says it is OK or illegal, just that the kick must be made behind or within the expanded NZ.

[Atlanta Blue]

Along this same play, may team K punt the ball again, whether it was blocked behind the NZ or if it was kicked beyond and rebounded behind the NZ? I can't find anything in the rule book or case book that says it is OK or illegal, just that the kick must be made behind or within the expanded NZ.

Yes, they may punt it again.  If K recovers the ball behind the LOS, they have all rights they had when the play started.

[mbyron]

Yes, they may punt it again.  If K recovers the ball behind the LOS, they have all rights they had when the play started.

Exactly: and the key point that always bears discussion in pre-game is that it matters only where the K recovers the kick, not how it got there. As AB says, if K recovers the kick behind the neutral zone, the ball's status is as if they had just snapped it.

[Atlanta Blue]

Exactly: and the key point that always bears discussion in pre-game is that it matters only where the K recovers the kick, not how it got there. As AB says, if K recovers the kick behind the neutral zone, the ball's status is as if they had just snapped it.

Well, it kind of does matter HOW it got there.

EXAMPLE:  4th and 10.  K punts, ball crosses the NZ, rebounds behind the LOS, is picked up by K, who runs for 5 yards.  Legal play, but ball will go over to R for K failing to reach the LTG.

Compare that to:  4th and 10.  K punts, ball crosses the NZ where it bounces off an R player, rebounds behind the LOS, is picked up by K, who runs for 5 yards.  K will now get a new series, 1st and 10.  Had K thrown an incomplete pass after recovering the ball, they STILL would get a new series.  But if they punt again, no new series unless K recovers after R once again touches the punt after it crosses the NZ.

[NWA_UMP]

Saw this happen...

K's kick is blocked by R behind NZ, K kicker recovers loose ball and scrambles to his right for a rugby style kick that goes beyond NZ and is fair caught by R. K kicker didn't cross NZ before kick and was flagged for illegal kick. R was given option of 5 yds from previous spot and re-kick or decline flag and take ball at fair catch spot...

[Atlanta Blue]

Saw this happen...

K's kick is blocked by R behind NZ, K kicker recovers loose ball and scrambles to his right for a rugby style kick that goes beyond NZ and is fair caught by R. K kicker didn't cross NZ before kick and was flagged for illegal kick. R was given option of 5 yds from previous spot and re-kick or decline flag and take ball at fair catch spot...

Hope you didn't see it as part of the crew!

1.  It's not an Illegal Kick
2.  If it were, Illegal Kick is a 15 yard penalty
3.  Since the foul was by K behind the basic spot, it would be a spot foul, not previous spot
4.  Decline and take the ball at the fair catch spot is the ONLY thing they got right here!

[NWA_UMP]

Not part of the crew...watching my son's Jr high team play. When you're in the stands you don't always hear or see everything that happens...especially when your son does not play on special teams...

It might have been a half distance penalty...inside the 20 when it happened. I thought it looked funny when it happened, but I didn't see the whole play...my wife gave me crap about being a typical official and only seeing what I wanted...glad my hearing is good at least

[mbyron]

Well, it kind of does matter HOW it got there.

EXAMPLE:  4th and 10.  K punts, ball crosses the NZ, rebounds behind the LOS, is picked up by K, who runs for 5 yards.  Legal play, but ball will go over to R for K failing to reach the LTG.

Compare that to:  4th and 10.  K punts, ball crosses the NZ where it bounces off an R player, rebounds behind the LOS, is picked up by K, who runs for 5 yards.  K will now get a new series, 1st and 10.  Had K thrown an incomplete pass after recovering the ball, they STILL would get a new series.  But if they punt again, no new series unless K recovers after R once again touches the punt after it crosses the NZ.

I was backing up your point that a kick recovered by K behind the NZ may be kicked again, passed, or advanced by K. For the purpose of supporting your claim, it does NOT matter how the ball got there.

For other considerations (such as awarding a new series) it might matter. I guess that'll teach me to try to agree with you. Sheesh! 

[SanDiegoStryker]

Had K thrown an incomplete pass after recovering the ball, they STILL would get a new series.

Whoa. You just blew my mind.