Fair Catch Signal

[Bob M.]

REPLY: Mike...the 'antagonist' in the thread Tom and I are talking about was a member of my local association, though to this day, I don't know who it was. He went by the screen name "Ref100." He contended that if a receiver signals behind the NZ, his signal is nothing more than than a player waving his hand. He said that it should be totally disregarded--by kickers, and officials. If he caught or recovered the kick, it would remain alive and he could advance. Despite virtually everyone's logical arguments to the contrary, he held fast to his position. Literally, "a voice crying in the wilderness." Despite the logical arguments for killing it (like Roamin' Umpire's excellent breakdown above), he would not budge.

Tom...I think you reversed your NF and NCAA rulings:
NF - ball remains alive
NCAA - ball is dead when signal is given
Right??

To Mike's other question...I would say Yes, flag it. The signal--regardless of where it's given--prohibits the signaler from blocking until the kick ends.

[kentref]

Question unrelated to my question to Bob.

Would we also flag the signaller if he blocked before the kick ended if he gave a signal while he was in or behind the neutral zone?

4th and 10 at the K-20. K1 punts the ball high but the kick never passes the neutral zone. While the ball is in the air, R1 signals for a fair catch at the K-19. The ball strikes the ground at the K-19 and bounces backwards to the K-15. Seeing that R2 is about to secure the ball, R1 blocks k3 to keep him from getting to the kick. How would we rule on this?

Great question. My initial reaction is to throw the flag for the illegal block. 6-5-1 states that "any" receiver who has given a valid or invalid fair-catch signal is prohibited from blocking until the kick has ended. It says nothing about the signaller's position on the field.










[/B][/QUOTE]

[Theisey]

Bob,
Those rulings were for a FC signal given behind the NZ.

[mikesears]

Originally posted by Bob M.
REPLY: Mike...the 'antagonist' in the thread Tom and I are talking about was a member of my local association, though to this day, I don't know who it was. He went by the screen name "Ref100." He contended that if a receiver signals behind the NZ, his signal is nothing more than than a player waving his hand. He said that it should be totally disregarded--by kickers, and officials. If he caught or recovered the kick, it would remain alive and he could advance. Despite virtually everyone's logical arguments to the contrary, he held fast to his position. Literally, "a voice crying in the wilderness." Despite the logical arguments for killing it (like Roamin' Umpire's excellent breakdown above), he would not budge.

Tom...I think you reversed your NF and NCAA rulings:
NF - ball remains alive
NCAA - ball is dead when signal is given
Right??

To Mike's other question...I would say Yes, flag it. The signal--regardless of where it's given--prohibits the signaler from blocking until the kick ends.

Thanks. I recall the phrase, "just waving his hand", but I couldn't remember the context. I thought the majority of people agreed, but apparently I was wrong. As it stands right now, I would also kill the play no matter where that fair catch signal was given.