Arkansas/VT punt fumble...
 

Think it was 1:57 left in the second.

Ark punts, vt muffs it and ark player nearly comes up with it. Whistle blows before he gains possession and VT recovers the ball. Chaos ensues.

Thoughts on the final ruling? IW is ruled and Ark is given the ball.

I was watching it without sound at the gym. They also called holding on VT on that play. I'm assuming since they gave the ball to Arkansas back near where they punted it (I didn't notice the exact yardage) after the official review that the holding was determined to be before the kick. I'm not positive about that, though.

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.

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

Here is the play and some discussion.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yzLEZiXqI3U" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

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

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?

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.

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.

Here is the ruling from the NCAA rulebook. The decision to penalize from the previous spot was correct, IF you rule an IW on the play. I stand with other individuals who have stated that there was an immediate act of recovery of the loose ball by VT, therefore the ball should have been given to VT at the point of the recovery minus the 10 yards for the holding penalty during the kick.

Live Ball Becomes Dead—ARTICLE 2
Approved Ruling 4-1-2
I. Fourth and 16 at the 50-yard line, Team A kicks. B1 clips on Team
B’s 40-yard line, and B2 muffs the kick on the 25-yard line. While
the ball is loose, an inadvertent whistle is sounded. RULING: If
Team A accepts the penalty, penalize Team B from the 50-yard line.
Team A’s ball, first and 10 on the 35-yard line. If Team A declines
the penalty, repeat the down.

For reference I have included some additional rules from the book.

Loose ball ruled dead, or live ball ruled dead in possession of a ball
carrier when the clear recovery of a loose ball occurs in the immediate
continuing action.
1. If the ball is ruled dead and the replay official does not have
indisputable video evidence as to which team recovers, the deadball
ruling stands.
2. If the replay official rules that the ball was not dead, it belongs to
the recovering team at the spot of the recovery and any advance is
nullified.

Is video replay the only possible exception to 4-1-2b.2 or 3? Say a receiver signals legally for a legal fair catch, and an official blows a whistle shortly before the receiver actually does catch the ball, in a game where no video is available. Could you make an equitable ruling that the whistle could neither have contributed to nor prevented the catch at that spot? And take away the kicking team's option to repeat the down, and if there was a foul during the kick apply post-kick enforcement provisions? In effect proceed as if the whistle sounded after the catch?

BTW, as I look at the video, I see no good clear case for the receiving team player's having gained possession soon enough that ruling recovery wouldn't violate the spirit of the IW provisions. I can't be sure that hearing the whistle didn't affect the players' actions, and the last thing you want is for players to not respect the whistle. I could call it "immediately continuing action" if there weren't an opposing player's hands so close to the ball at the time of the whistle. It may also be that #36 would've overrun the ball if he hadn't started slowing down in rxn to the whistle!

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 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.

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