Effect of a Touched Kick

[jack015]

Originally posted by mmaguth
I'm a new official and find myself very confused here.
Here's my take on it:

1. We have a scrimmage kick touched beyond the neutral zone by R, This now can be recovered by K or R at this point and a new series is awarded to the recovering team. (Rule 6-2-4)

The ball returns beyond the neutral zone where it is recovered by K and passed forward for an incomplete pass. *Here I would think is was an illegal forward pass since possession has changed during the down due to R's touching? (7-5-2a) You would have IFP on K and enforce 5yrds from spot of foul 1st and 10 K's ball.

Or would that not be considered change of possession since it was a muff by R (2-26), therefore the ball remains K's since they resecured possesion. You would then have a legal forward pass behind the neutral zone by K, which is incomplete. It would be 1st and 10 from K's 45, since they are awarded a new series due to R's touching.

Does this sound close at all or make any sense?

You have pretty much got it right. The way the play in question is described, K recovered the kick (no change of possession) behind the LOS. This play is a classic example of a situation where Fundamental Statement II-3 on pg. 74 of the Rule Book and FS VI-2 on pg. 75 apply.

Since you are new to officiating and if you have not already realized it, if you learn the Fundamental Statements to the extent that when you see a situation on the field that a FS can be applied to, a light will start to come on in your brain when it happens and you should be able to analyze what happened and rule correctly.

Best of luck in your new avocation.

[Edited by jack015 on Aug 29th, 2005 at 07:27 AM]

[mmaguth]

Thanks, I appreciate your reply. This is going to be an adventure, lol.

[rdfox]

If the pass from behind the line was to one of the ineligibles, and he touched it (but dropped it, making it an incomplete pass), wouldn't you give R two choices:

a. the play, which results in K getting the ball 1st and 10 from the previous spot using the downfield muff by R as the rationale, or

b. the penalty, which results in a 15 yard penalty plus B's ball since it came with a loss of down?

[dumbref]

Loss of Down has nothing to do with it. Since K (the team) is in possession at the end of the down and K's foul(s) occurred after the kick ended, it is going to be K's ball 1st and 10 after applying any penalty you can think of.

5-1-3f

[Edited by dumbref on Aug 29th, 2005 at 01:35 PM]

[rdfox]

Thanks for the 5-1-3f reference. I'm still thinking that you're mixing both the result of the play and the result of the penalty, and you generally can't have both...but I'll have to think that one through some more.

In looking at 5-1-3, however, why wouldn't subsection (e) apply? K did legally kick the ball and the ball did become dead with no player in possession (incomplete pass). Doesn't (e) say it should therefore go to R?

It seems to me that the play we've got has found a dilemma between (e) which includes a reference to player possession and (f) which refers to team possession.

[dumbref]

5-1-3e is referring to when the "kick ends" with no player in possession. In this case, the kick has ended with K in team possession.

5-1-3f is talking about team possesion at the end of the "down" when R is first to touch the kick beyond the ENZ

[dh898]

What I don't understand about this play is why would the pass be legal. If R muffs the punt, the ball rolls back to K 45 recoverd by K. Now if K just falls on the ball it is 1 - 10 for K on K"s 45. Since the line to gain vanishes with the muff why would a forward pass be legal since the intend of K was to religuish the ball. Does the LOS also vanish except in case of a penalty?

I'm a newbie by the way.

[Warrenkicker]

Nothing that you have mentioned "vanishes." There are only two areas in the high school game which "disolve." They are the free-blocking zone and the expanded neutral zone during a scrimmage kick. The neutral zone still exists throughout the down. And in this play, even though the ball was legally kicked and it was touched beyond the neutral zone, the neutral zone still exists and since K snapped the ball they are still allowed to throw a legal forward pass from in or behind the neutral zone. That changes if there is any change of possession.

The touching by R means that either team can possess the ball at the end of the down and be awarded a first down.

[dumbref]

Read 7-5-1 & 2-27 Team possession never changed. R only muffed the ball and never established possession. There fore the neutral zone is still in effect, the line to gain is still in effect and the previledge to pass is still in effect (once).

5-1-3 establishes the different ways a new series is awarded. The muff by R beyond the ENZ is just one of those. Hope that helped.

[mjones]

This play is a good reason to change the rule ... that the neutral zone disappears once a kick is touched by R beyond the expanded neutral zone.

If anyone knows rules or has comments that would contradict this change, I would like to hear them.

[dh898]

OK, I think I understand the logic. It's pretty obvious that there would be ineligible receivers illegally downfield so it would still be K's ball, moved back 5 yards and be 1-10 on K's 40. Do I have it right now if this is true?

[Warrenkicker]

You, at least, are clearly on one side of the arguement now. Is that the correct ruling? We are still waiting on that I think but I would agree with you.

[BayouUmp]

Since kick was touched beyone ENZ, new series for team in possession at end of down. Since K recovered behind ENZ, they may advance (including pass). 1st and 10 for K. Start the clock on the Ready.

[dumbref]

Originally posted by BayouUmp
Since kick was touched beyone ENZ, new series for team in possession at end of down. Since K recovered behind ENZ, they may advance (including pass). 1st and 10 for K. Start the clock on the Ready.

A good point I had not thought of. But unless 2 "other thans" = a "just do it" - I think 3-4-2a says you would not start the clock with the ready if either team is awarded a new series following a legal kick.

[Edited by dumbref on Aug 30th, 2005 at 03:31 PM]

[BayouUmp]

I believe you are correct, "other than" when you are not.

I totally skipped the 'legal kick' exception. thx