Quote:
Originally Posted by scrounge
Sounds like roughing may not enter into this, because with the muffed snap and a loose ball laying around, it's not reasonably certain that a kick will occur at all.
|
Especially since the contact occurred
before the attempted kick.
Quote:
|
So unless the contact is otherwise a personal foul (spearing, illegal helmet contact, etc) or you think the contact could have been avoided once it was apparent a kick was going to be made,
|
I don't see how you could ever have roughing-the-holder for its being apparent a kick
was going to be made, if the kick had not (yet) been made.
Quote:
Absent that, all I have is illegal kicking, because of the ball not being controlled by a teammate or fulfilling the requirements of a drop kick. Fed has a case play that pretty much covers this one:
9.7.1 SITUATION A:
On a field-goal attempt, holder A2 muffs the snap and is attempting to gain possession of the ball on the ground when A1 kicks it between the uprights over the crossbar.
RULING: An illegal kick by A1. If the penalty is declined, the result of the play is a touchback as the illegal kick cannot score a field goal. (2-24-7)
|
I figured it likely there'd be a case play somewhat on point, but this one doesn't look close enough. A holder's attempting to gain possession of the ball on the ground reads differently from a ball that hasn't even fallen all the way over. In the case play, the kicker definitely still wanted to kick that ball even while seeing it was loose. In the play here, it's likely the kicker had started his motion and had no chance to pull up in time to not meet the ball with his foot. So I'm not sure it fits Fed's illegal kick provision. Because of different wording, though, it does fit NCAA's ruling of illegal kick. So in NCAA, illegal kick, but in Fed, it's a nothing, just a loose ball. Team A provided the impetus if the ball enters B's end zone.