The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2011, 01:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 321
There was no kick, so you can't have roughing the kicker.

And how can you have roughing the holder? There was no kick - so they essentially tackled the ball carrier.

Would have to see it, of course, but it appears that this was a legal play. The only call you make is to another crew to say "You should have seen our play tonight!"
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2011, 09:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by jTheUmp View Post
You won't find any rulebook basis to support this assertion.

Just because the holder can rise to run/pass does not mean that the holder is required to do so. As long as he's still controlling the ball on the kicking tee, he's still a holder, and thus, can potentially be roughed.
Impossible if there's nobody in position to kick. The intended kicker has been pulled down. There is no longer an exception in effect to the rule that makes the ball dead if the player in possession of it is kneeling.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 13, 2011, 07:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
Impossible if there's nobody in position to kick. The intended kicker has been pulled down. There is no longer an exception in effect to the rule that makes the ball dead if the player in possession of it is kneeling.
The exception applies if "at the snap, a place-kick holder with his knee(s) on the ground and with a teammate in kicking position catches or recovers the snap while his knee(s) is on the ground and places the ball for a kick, or if he rises to advance, hand, kick or pass."

The teammate was in kicking position at the snap so the exception is in force and, since it doesn't say while a teammate is in kicking position, there's no reason why the exception would end just because the teammate is no longer in kicking position for any reason.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 13, 2011, 10:10am
Moderator M-800
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 7,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
Impossible if there's nobody in position to kick. The intended kicker has been pulled down. There is no longer an exception in effect to the rule that makes the ball dead if the player in possession of it is kneeling.
Sigh... read the rule please. Specifically look for the exception and when it is determined whether that exception is in play.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 13, 2011, 03:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire View Post
The exception applies if "at the snap, a place-kick holder with his knee(s) on the ground and with a teammate in kicking position catches or recovers the snap while his knee(s) is on the ground and places the ball for a kick, or if he rises to advance, hand, kick or pass."

The teammate was in kicking position at the snap so the exception is in force and, since it doesn't say while a teammate is in kicking position, there's no reason why the exception would end just because the teammate is no longer in kicking position for any reason.
But once the kicker is gone, the holder ceases to place the ball for a kick. If your interpret'n were correct, that placing the ball for a kick were simply an act that is completed once the ball is teed up, then while in that position the holder who momentarily teed up the ball could then do anything with the ball and it would remain alive. Yet we know that's not the case, because there's a separate exception to allow him to rise, and it's well established that he can't pass the ball from the kneeling position in Fed rules. Therefore placing the ball for a kick must be a continuing action that ends only when the ball is kicked or the holder rises; it is not completed once the ball is teed up, it is ongoing while the ball is held in that position for an ostensible place kick. If there is no kicker in position, then the exception no longer applies.
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 14, 2011, 08:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
But once the kicker is gone, the holder ceases to place the ball for a kick. If your interpret'n were correct, that placing the ball for a kick were simply an act that is completed once the ball is teed up, then while in that position the holder who momentarily teed up the ball could then do anything with the ball and it would remain alive. Yet we know that's not the case, because there's a separate exception to allow him to rise, and it's well established that he can't pass the ball from the kneeling position in Fed rules. Therefore placing the ball for a kick must be a continuing action that ends only when the ball is kicked or the holder rises; it is not completed once the ball is teed up, it is ongoing while the ball is held in that position for an ostensible place kick. If there is no kicker in position, then the exception no longer applies.
Your saying that "places a ball for a kick" implicitly includes a teammate in a kicking position, placing a ball for a kick is an ongoing action, and the exception terminates if the ongoing action ceases without the holder rising appropriately. Let's look at them in that order.

If "places a ball for a kick" implicitly includes having a teammate in a kicking position, why would the rule specifically require a teammate in a kicking position and placing the ball for a kick? That would be redundant. I submit placing a ball for a kick is merely putting the ball on the ground so that it can be placed kicked since that action has no other football purpose.

I'll go along with it being an ongoing action but I don't believe it has much relevance as the exception will continue as long as he holds the ball to the ground.

The third point is basically moot as we'd all agree the play is dead if the holder did something other than holding the ball to the ground or rising.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 14, 2011, 12:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire View Post
If "places a ball for a kick" implicitly includes having a teammate in a kicking position, why would the rule specifically require a teammate in a kicking position and placing the ball for a kick?
That's a good point, as it wasn't always part of the rules provision, and did use to be implicit. All I know is, if Fed thought they'd clarified this with their current wording, they're wrong. But I had missed that apparently there's now no exception for a ball received from other than either a snap or muffed ball from a snap, which would preclude the scenario brought up here from the video a while ago, i.e. the possibility of a 2nd place kick from a blocked kick -- unless the placer squats instead of kneeling.

I can think of one play situation where the 2 interpret'ns would make a practical difference. What happens when a fake place kick play involves the kicker's closely missing the ball and faking a follow-thru, and then after a delay during which the placer has gotten his body position around to better conceal the ball (and the defense is all looking downfield to try to find it), he arises to continue play? One interpret'n would allow play to continue, the other not.

Also, assuming play is allowed to continue, would the placer be allowed to draw the ball closer to his body to conceal it while he's still on the ground? How about drumming on the ball to simulate the sound of the kicker's foot hitting it?
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 14, 2011, 02:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
Also, assuming play is allowed to continue, would the placer be allowed to draw the ball closer to his body to conceal it while he's still on the ground? How about drumming on the ball to simulate the sound of the kicker's foot hitting it?
If it's not kickable from that position, I think he'd be down as it's no longer placed for kicking. I don't see a problem with drumming the ball as far as the exception goes.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 14, 2011, 03:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 72
Would it make a difference if the kicker was just shoved "down" on his way to but prior to kicking the ball.

Right footed kicker..... end rusher came from the right defensive end
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Sat Oct 15, 2011, 02:13am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire View Post
If it's not kickable from that position, I think he'd be down as it's no longer placed for kicking.
Well, that's what I thought, but others are saying the condition of placing the ball for a kick needs to be satisfied only for a moment, and then he's not down later even if one or more of those conditions no longer apply.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 17, 2011, 10:45am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
Well, that's what I thought, but others are saying the condition of placing the ball for a kick needs to be satisfied only for a moment, and then he's not down later even if one or more of those conditions no longer apply.
But your conditioning what he is doing based on the continued presence of a potential kicker, who is only required to be there at the snap, whereas, I'm conditioning it only on him ceasing to hold the ball for a kick without rising.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 17, 2011, 02:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire View Post
But your conditioning what he is doing based on the continued presence of a potential kicker, who is only required to be there at the snap, whereas, I'm conditioning it only on him ceasing to hold the ball for a kick without rising.
With the rule written as it is, I don't see any reason to read either one as a continuing condition and not the other.
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 17, 2011, 02:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
With the rule written as it is, I don't see any reason to read either one as a continuing condition and not the other.
I must respectfully disagree.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Fri Nov 11, 2011, 03:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 72
Have video of the play

I can't pull the exact time because youtube blocked here at work but it's roughly 1/2 way to 2/3rd into it.

Riverheads vs Page County Football Highlights - YouTube
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Fri Nov 11, 2011, 04:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 321
That's just good defense (and a poor snap) - I got nothing.

I also got a no call on the block in the back along the sideline a few plays earlier.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
roughing the kicker golfdesigner Football 5 Mon Aug 07, 2006 03:08am
Roughing the Kicker jlawyer55 Football 5 Sun Oct 23, 2005 06:54pm
Roughing the Kicker New AZ Ref Football 5 Fri Oct 07, 2005 03:19pm
Roughing the kicker Texoma_LJ Football 5 Wed Oct 06, 2004 09:29am
Roughing the kicker DeltaRef Football 5 Tue Dec 16, 2003 09:20pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:42pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1