Notre Dame fake FG - was holder down by rule?

[bwburke94]

Notre Dame Scores Touchdown On Extremely Well-Designed Fake Field Goal

NCAA rules, of course.

[Rich]

Not in NCAA rules. NFHS he has to lift the knee.

[BoomerSooner]

I don't think the rule is particularly clear on when the exception ends, so I'm having trouble with this play. My gut tells me once the kicker is no longer in position to kick the ball or simulate a kick, the exception ends and the ball is dead. The way the rule is written leads me believe with my head that the only requirement of the exception is that a player be in position to kick the ball at the snap. From there I logically concluded that as long as that requirement is met, the holder can remain with a knee on the ground independent of what the kicker does until some other criteria is met for to declare the ball dead.

That said, I'm leaning toward my gut and this being a dead ball because the kicker was no longer in position to kick the ball or simulate a kick when the pass was made. The nature of the pass (forward or backward, to the kicker or another player, immediate or following a fake) by itself has no influence on my decision in this situation. The timing of it combined with the position of the kicker is what bothers me here. To make my point, I compare this to the famed LSU fake FG from several years ago. In that situation the holder received the snap, placed the ball on the ground and almost immediately tossed it over his head to the kicker. Had he faked a pass to an end pulling behind the line and then tossed it to the kicker or any other player, my key for making the call would be the location of the kicker. If he's still in position to kick or simulate a kick (or even in the process of simulating a kick) the ball remains live. If the kicker is running toward the sideline, then I'm declaring it a dead ball.

Please note that no part of me believes my interpretation is necessarily correct. I'm just explaining how I would officiate this situation based on my understanding of the rule as written. Please feel free to let me know I'm wrong, but if so, please let me know why.

[MD Longhorn]

Or, you could attend a clinic which would tell you the opposite.

The rulebook has no end to this exception because there's no end to this exception.

If it helps you understand it, the holder, in this circumstance, is treated like an NFL player who has inadvertently gone to the ground under his own power. With no expiration date.

[BoomerSooner]

Thanks for the explanation MD. I've never worked a game under NCAA rules, and this is one instance where I think the NFHS rule is better written. That may not be a fair comparison since the rules are different, but I think NFHS is pretty clear on this.

If the time ever comes for me to cross the river to call a game or I advance to the NCAA world, I'll get my butt into enough clinics to have cleared up these types of things.

[MD Longhorn]

Fair enough. And sorry if I came off as harsh by recommending a clinic. It bugs me when people post things like "MY interpretation", when there's no such thing - there is only the interpretation of our respective PTB.

This rule is pretty clear. It's only by reading into it what you perceive as right (likely from other rulesets) that the waters get muddied. The rule provides and perfectly describes an exception. No words need to be added to clear up when the exception goes away because the exception doesn't go away.

[BoomerSooner]

No worries...I just thought it was Sooner-Longhorn banter, and quite honestly, when is the recommendation to get into more camps ever a bad one? Clearly you picked up that my knowledge is lacking in a specific area, so why not point me in a direction to help me improve. That's how I took it more than anything.

Regarding your comments about inserting my "interpretation" into the matter, you are absolutely right ( I just admitted a Longhorn is right about something). The literal side of my brain usually wins these types of arguments and led me to the explanation you gave. I just ignored it this time partly because I personally think it is silly that the exception doesn't go away ever. I've also never had an issue with calling a game as the rules are written supplemented by approved rulings and the interpretations of those with more experience and authority than me, so at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter what I think is silly.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BoomerSooner

No worries...I just thought it was Sooner-Longhorn banter, and quite honestly, when is the recommendation to get into more camps ever a bad one? Clearly you picked up that my knowledge is lacking in a specific area, so why not point me in a direction to help me improve. That's how I took it more than anything.

Regarding your comments about inserting my "interpretation" into the matter, you are absolutely right ( I just admitted a Longhorn is right about something). The literal side of my brain usually wins these types of arguments and led me to the explanation you gave. I just ignored it this time partly because I personally think it is silly that the exception doesn't go away ever. I've also never had an issue with calling a game as the rules are written supplemented by approved rulings and the interpretations of those with more experience and authority than me, so at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter what I think is silly.

It does go away -- when the holder gets tackled!

[Texas Aggie]

I don't think the rule is particularly clear on when the exception ends, so I'm having trouble with this play.

No need for trouble. It was clearly legal. He can stay on his knee all day, and can even rise to receive the snap, go back down, and stay there.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Rich

It does go away -- when the holder gets tackled!

Meaning so held that his forward progress (such as it was) is stopped. So really the exception never goes away.