NFHS Rule Question on Fair Catch Protection

[refdawg]

Need an NFHS interpretation of a play situation:

B player gives a valid fair catch signal on a punt and muffs the ball. Right after he muffs the ball, he is hit by an A player. I have been told this is a legal play. Here is my confusion-- the rule states that a player who gives a valid fair catch signal is afforded protection until the kick ends or becomes dead by rule. Well, if a B player gives a valid fair catch signal and muffs the ball, the kick has not ended, nor is it dead by rule. Is it legal for him to be hit after he muffs the ball and before the kick ends?

[Mike L]

Where in the book does it state he has protection until the kick ends? Look at 2-9-1 and 6-5-6. This play is also specifically addressed in the case book under 6-5-6 sit E.
This is a legal play.

[Patton]

Originally posted by refdawg
the rule states that a player who gives a valid fair catch signal is afforded protection until the kick ends or becomes dead by rule

Where are you reading this?

6-5-2 It is a fair catch and the ball is dead if any receiver gives a valid fair catch signal, as in Article 1, and he catches a free kick in or beyound the neutral zone to R's goal line, or a scrimmage kick beyond the neutral zone to R's goal line. If he muffs the ball, then he didn't make the catch and can be contacted.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by refdawg
Here is my confusion-- the rule states that a player who gives a valid fair catch signal is afforded protection until the kick ends or becomes dead by rule.

Welcome to the board!

Always read the rule before you cite it because if you're wrong, the first person who reads it will know it.

[Theisey]

OK, I originally started a post but got interrupted, hit the wrong key and wound up having to quickly delete it because I couldn't finish it... sorry.

I started it off by saying something like I can't wait to see the debate on this one. An then followed that up with I'd disagree with anyone who says it is legal.

I still feel that and believe our "Safety" conscience NF rules people undermined player safety with this ruling. Sure, it may happen only once a season but to let a guy who asked for FC protection to get slammed because he bobbled (i.e muffed) the ball is just not right.
However, I do have to agree it is not a foul under currently written NFHS rules.


Couple years back, NCAA added a rule that affords the receiver who has given a valid signal, FC protection even if he muffs the ball provided the opportunity to complete the catch is there present. The kicking team has to adjust for that should it occur.
I'm sure if I dig up the rule change memo it says something about player safety as he is still in a vulnerable position.
Maybe I'm too obsesed with the NCAA version, but that's the way I feel. NF should change their rule.

[Mike L]

What do you do about the player who continues to "muff" the ball as he advances to the EZ? How many "muffs" does he get? What if the muff has been grounded? Does he still get a chance to pick it up unmolested? I gotta admit the slight bobble I'm going to rule in favor of the receiver. But if I can see clear air between his hands and the ball after the muff, he better get ready for a shot that may be coming.

[Theisey]

By definition, you can't catch a kick that has been grounded. Don't assume a muff means it's on the ground. Should it be on the ground, the special protection is off.

If there was to be an NF rule change, it would have to state that if a valid fair catch signal was made, that receiver would have an unimpeded opportunity to catch the muffed kick. He could very well have bobbled more than once while moving forward or backward to catch the kick.


The NCAA rule will place the ball at the spot where it is was first touched by the receiver rather than where the catch was finally completed. So it would do him no good to juggle the ball as he makes it way to the EZ.
Intentionally muffing the ball is considered (by rule) to be an illegal bata and therefore a flag.

[mikesears]

Originally posted by Mike L
What do you do about the player who continues to "muff" the ball as he advances to the EZ?

Rule the intentional muff a bat.