Arkansas/VT punt fumble...

[Legacy Zebra]

The hold was during the kick. They went with calling it an IW while the kick was loose, thus giving Arkansas the ball back plus the 10 yards from the previous spot giving them a first down. Replay should have ruled that VT recovered in the immediate continuing action and enforced the holding from the spot of recovery.

[JRutledge]

Give me some time and I will post the video. The discussion is hilarious between the commentators which I cannot post all of this, but will show you the play. And replay played a role in this as well as to if there was possession by VT on the muff recovery.

Lesson most of all to be learned, DO NOT BLOW THE DARN WHISTLE UNTIL YOU SEE LEATHER!!!! How many times do we have to tell officials this and they get caught up into trying to "save the players" from some kind of injury or late hit. Who the freak cares if you do not blow the darn whistle? Wait and you still can throw a flag. Well this shows why you do not blow the whistle until you have the play actually over.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Here is the play and some discussion.


Peace

[Adam]

So, let me ask regarding NCAA rules.

Without the IW, what is the enforcement spot for holding during the punt? Does it matter whether the hold was before or after the kick?

Does the IW change this equation? Given that this was reviewed in the booth, I have to assume the booth got the ruling correct.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Adam

So, let me ask regarding NCAA rules.

Without the IW, what is the enforcement spot for holding during the punt? Does it matter whether the hold was before or after the kick?

Does the IW change this equation? Given that this was reviewed in the booth, I have to assume the booth got the ruling correct.

I would have to look this up to be a 100 percent sure, but a penalty if enforced, makes the IW not applicable to the enforcement. If they decline the penalty, then you have to give the option to the team in possession. At least that is clearly the NF application. I believe or have no reason to believe the rule in college is any different.

Peace

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I would have to look this up to be a 100 percent sure, but a penalty if enforced, makes the IW not applicable to the enforcement. If they decline the penalty, then you have to give the option to the team in possession. At least that is clearly the NF application. I believe or have no reason to believe the rule in college is any different.

But in the case of the acceptance of a penalty for a foul by R during a kick that ends with an IW, where would it be enforced from? End of the kick, i.e. where the ball was when the whistle was heard?

[jpgc99]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

But in the case of the acceptance of a penalty for a foul by R during a kick that ends with an IW, where would it be enforced from? End of the kick, i.e. where the ball was when the whistle was heard?

No, the spot where the ball is when the whistle sounds is not the enforcement spot. In the case of an IW during this loose ball, the only enforcement spot is the previous spot in this case. However, replay should have ruled immediate recovery. If that had happened, you now have possession (and therefore the end of the kick). Enforce the hold from that spot.

[Middleman]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

But in the case of the acceptance of a penalty for a foul by R during a kick that ends with an IW, where would it be enforced from? End of the kick, i.e. where the ball was when the whistle was heard?

The key to getting this right is the spot of the foul. Under the inadvertent whistle rule, the penalty is administered as determined by the basic spot. If the spot of the foul was beyond the expanded neutral zone, it would be a PSK foul enforced from the end of the kick. If the foul was in or behind the expanded neutral zone, it would be a loose ball foul enforced from the previous spot.

The foul was reported as “Holding,” and there was a flag near the expanded neutral zone, around the 21 yard line. Most likely a Receiver grabbed a Gunner and wouldn’t let him off the line. In that case, it would be a previous spot enforcement and, if NCAA is the same as NFHS, the crew got it right.

[Middleman]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I would have to look this up to be a 100 percent sure, but a penalty if enforced, makes the IW not applicable to the enforcement. If they decline the penalty, then you have to give the option to the team in possession. At least that is clearly the NF application.

I’m not sure what you’re trying to say about giving a team an option. Under FED rules, if the penalty is declined then there is no option. The down must be replayed.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Middleman

I’m not sure what you’re trying to say about giving a team an option. Under FED rules, if the penalty is declined then there is no option. The down must be replayed.

The option goes to the team that is the offended team of the penalty. They could decline the penalty. And if you accept the penalty, the IW is ignored or not applied.

Peace

[jpgc99]

Originally Posted by Adam

So, let me ask regarding NCAA rules.

Without the IW, what is the enforcement spot for holding during the punt? Does it matter whether the hold was before or after the kick?

Does the IW change this equation? Given that this was reviewed in the booth, I have to assume the booth got the ruling correct.

With no IW, a hold during the kick is enforced at the spot where the kick ends.

If there is a true IW before the kick ends, the only enforcement spot is the previous spot.

However, replay should have ruled that the receiving team gained possession in the immediate continuing action after the IW. This effectively negates the IW and gives a spot of clear possession by the receiving team. This spot is also the end of the kick and should be the enforcement spot for the hold.