|
I've been looking closely at the casebook and found that our play would most likely have resulted in a TB (yet still unfair to R IMO).
IN casebook 8.5.3 sit A with 4th and 7 from K's 10. K1's punt from EZ. The kick is partially blocked and barely moving at K's 2 when R's muff provides a new force which moves the ball into, and out of, the EZ Ruling: TB. Because it was the new force by R1 which caused the ball to go out of K's EZ, the result is a TB instead of safety (sites 2.13.1;8.5.3b)
The safety argument could be argued though sit different than previous discussed with... 8.5.2 sit B; with 4th and 3 from his own 10 yd line the scrimmage kick by k1 is blocked so that it REBOUNDS INTO k's endzone and (a)is muffed OOB in the EZ by either K or R or (b)is simmultaneously recovered in the EZ by K2 and R1 RULING in (a)safety, (b) touchdown
somewhere in the middle...8.5.2 sit C:K1's punt is blocked on K's 5 yd ln. and the ball is slowly rolling near the goal line. R1 attempts to recover and just barely touches the ball.The ball then rolls into the EZ where K2 falls on it. RULING: the covering official will have to judge whether or not a new force resulted from R1's touch. The official must decide whether the original force was such that the ball could have gone into the EZ regardless of the muff. If the official has doubt, he will rule that the force was supplied by the kick, thus resulting in a safety. If the official rules R1 supplied the force, it is a touchback.
so here are some additional casebook cases. input if you would like thanks.
|