Stumping you chumps question of the day

[kdf5]

MJT was kind enough to let me join late and Friday's are my day so I thought I'd post on Thursday as I can't stand the excitement.

Here goes. Answer each part in #2 and cite specific rules.

1. 4th and 3 at R's 25. K1's field goal is good. During the kick R1 grabs but doesn't twist K3's facemask.

a. at the line of scrimmage
b. at R's 10.

2. The snapper:

a. may be positioned with his shoulders perpendicular to the opponent's goalline.
b. may lock legs with the lineman or either side of him.
c. May be contacted immediately after the ball is snapped regardless of the play situation or formation used by team A
d. can, under certain circumstances, be an eligible receiver at the snap.

[ljudge]

#1) I have the same ruling in both A and B. That is, enforce the foul as during "loose ball play" and give K a first down or accept the result of the play and enforce the foul from the succeeding spot. In B I have PSK not being applied since K was in possession of the ball at the end of the play.

#2)
a - false - 7.2.3, 7.2.5a
b - true - 7.2.2
c - false - 9.4.5
d - true - 7.5.6.a

[MJT]

Originally posted by kdf5
MJT was kind enough to let me join late and Friday's are my day so I thought I'd post on Thursday as I can't stand the excitement.

Here goes. Answer each part in #2 and cite specific rules.

1. 4th and 3 at R's 25. K1's field goal is good. During the kick R1 grabs but doesn't twist K3's facemask.

a. at the line of scrimmage
b. at R's 10.

2. The snapper:

a. may be positioned with his shoulders perpendicular to the opponent's goalline.
b. may lock legs with the lineman or either side of him.
c. May be contacted immediately after the ball is snapped regardless of the play situation or formation used by team A
d. can, under certain circumstances, be an eligible receiver at the snap.

For NF:
#1 A and B both have the same possibilities. Accept 5 yard penalty from the PS and have 1-10 at the 20, or have the FG count and take the 5 yard penalties enforced from the succeeding spot (the kickoff)

#2 A. No, they must be approximately parallel. 2-30-14
B. Yes 7-2-2
C. No, not if in scrimmage kick formation 9-4-5
D. Yes, if on the end of the LOS and wearing an eligible number. 7-5-6a


I believe all are the same for NCAA as well.

[Warrenkicker]

2C True.

9-4-5 Only if the contact is direct in a scrimmage-kick formation is it a foul. To say any contact in this formation is a foul is incorrect.

I hope we all know what this rule means. But to make a blanket statement about what might be refered to as a judgement call when you don't know what the contact is can get you in trouble. Just like a punter complaining to you after he is bumped that it should be a foul because his coach told him that he can't touch the punter.

If this question said "directly contacted" then I would agree that this is false.

I'm not picking on you kdf5 but we have to be clear on the description of the play or we could get a lot of different answers depending on how people read it and what they read into it.

[JasonTX]

1. 4th and 3 at R's 25. K1's field goal is good. During the kick R1 grabs but doesn't twist K3's facemask.

a. at the line of scrimmage
b. at R's 10.


NCAA

In (a) this wouldn't qualify as PSK since the foul occured less than 3 yards from the neutral zone, so enforce the 5 yard facemask (if accepted) from the previous spot. The yardage results in a 1st and 10 at the R20. Clock starts on the snap.

In (b) this foul does qualify for PSK but there is no spot to enforce this so the penalty is declined by rule.

[kdf5]

Originally posted by Warrenkicker
2C True.

9-4-5 Only if the contact is direct in a scrimmage-kick formation is it a foul. To say any contact in this formation is a foul is incorrect.

I hope we all know what this rule means. But to make a blanket statement about what might be refered to as a judgement call when you don't know what the contact is can get you in trouble. Just like a punter complaining to you after he is bumped that it should be a foul because his coach told him that he can't touch the punter.

If this question said "directly contacted" then I would agree that this is false.

I'm not picking on you kdf5 but we have to be clear on the description of the play or we could get a lot of different answers depending on how people read it and what they read into it.

I wouldn't take this as picking on me but the question is what it is. Can he be contacted is a good question and as you explained there are varied answers. It's typical Fed wording and as we all know Fed questions can be more about grammar than football. So true is your answer for 2c?

[Edited by kdf5 on Dec 3rd, 2004 at 10:19 AM]

[MJT]

Originally posted by Warrenkicker
2C True.

9-4-5 Only if the contact is direct in a scrimmage-kick formation is it a foul. To say any contact in this formation is a foul is incorrect.

I hope we all know what this rule means. But to make a blanket statement about what might be refered to as a judgement call when you don't know what the contact is can get you in trouble. Just like a punter complaining to you after he is bumped that it should be a foul because his coach told him that he can't touch the punter.

If this question said "directly contacted" then I would agree that this is false.

I'm not picking on you kdf5 but we have to be clear on the description of the play or we could get a lot of different answers depending on how people read it and what they read into it.

The question was very clear. kdf5 said he was in scrimmage kick formation and "can the snapper be contaced immediately no matter the formation?" No, he cannot be if they are in scrimmage kick formation, which they were. So NO in 2c he may not be contacted immediately.

[Warrenkicker]

Originally posted by MJT

The question was very clear. kdf5 said he was in scrimmage kick formation and "can the snapper be contaced immediately no matter the formation?" No, he cannot be if they are in scrimmage kick formation, which they were. So NO in 2c he may not be contacted immediately.

But rule 9-4-5 says "A defensive player may not charge directly into the snapper when the offensive team is in a scrimmage-kick formation." It does not say that the snapper can not be contacted. It says "directly charge into". If an R player is trying to block the kick and he rushes past the snapper and some contact is made would this be a foul? Roughing the snapper is the call when the contact is aimed at or through the snapper but not when the contact is an attempt to get around the snapper and not through him.

I say this all comes down to what the definition of "immediately contact" as opposed to "directly charge into". If you determine those are the same then the answer to the initial question is false. But if those have different meanings then the answer is true.

[MJT]

Originally posted by Warrenkicker

But rule 9-4-5 says "A defensive player may not charge directly into the snapper when the offensive team is in a scrimmage-kick formation." It does not say that the snapper can not be contacted. It says "directly charge into". If an R player is trying to block the kick and he rushes past the snapper and some contact is made would this be a foul? Roughing the snapper is the call when the contact is aimed at or through the snapper but not when the contact is an attempt to get around the snapper and not through him.

I say this all comes down to what the definition of "immediately contact" as opposed to "directly charge into". If you determine those are the same then the answer to the initial question is false. But if those have different meanings then the answer is true.

I agree, it depends on how you see the contact.

[kdf5]

Originally posted by MJT

The question was very clear. kdf5 said he was in scrimmage kick formation and "can the snapper be contaced immediately no matter the formation?" No, he cannot be if they are in scrimmage kick formation, which they were. So NO in 2c he may not be contacted immediately.

Actualy the question didn't say they were in SKF, but says contacted immediately regardless of the formation or play situation. Shooting the center/guard gap will always produce contact though there's no roughing. We had a coach once yell about the roughing because the nose guard would put his hands on the center after the SKF snap but wouldn't do anything else.

[MJT]

But the question said they were kicking a FG, so SKF.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: My thoughts...

FEDERATION:
Agree with most that #1a & b are both enforced from the previous spot. Specifically, 1b is not PSK enforceable because the play resulted in a successful field goal (see NF 2-16-2g)

2a) False -- "must" not "may"
2b) True
2c) True -- tough one to answer the way it's worded. He may may contacted immediately as long as it's not direct contact. If he's contacted immediately after the snap by a defender shooting the gap, it's legal in Federation.
2d) True

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by MJT
But the question said they were kicking a FG, so SKF.

REPLY: In most cases, you're correct. But what would you say if the holder was positioned only five yards back from the snapper?

[MJT]

Originally posted by Bob M.

REPLY: In most cases, you're correct. But what would you say if the holder was positioned only five yards back from the snapper?

By definition the holder must be at least 7 yards back and in position to receive a long snap, and no other player in position to receive a hand to hand. Now it had better be 5 yards, cuz if it is 6, that is close enough and I am going with INTENT.

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by MJT

By definition the holder must be at least 7 yards back and in position to receive a long snap, and no other player in position to receive a hand to hand. Now it had better be 5 yards, cuz if it is 6, that is close enough and I am going with INTENT.

REPLY: I agree completely. Even as a mathematician, I'll agree that in your case 6.5 = 7 !!