Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Just because he can't make a fair catch doesn't mean his protection ends. You can quote as many inapplicable rules as you want, it doesn't change the facts. As I said there is no rule that tells us when the protection ends. There is no case book play that tells us when the protection ends. There is a rule however, (6-5-1) that tells us that the (fair catcher-new word) can't block until the kick has ended. So we know that in exchange for fair catch protection, the fair catcher is restricted. If we are going to read into the rules (which I am not) it is far more sensible that his protection would be equal to his restriction (ie protection until the kick ends... not until the kick hits the ground).

Otherwise we are back to this situation

Fair catcher (FC) gives a valid fair catch signal but does not catch the ball. One microsecond after the ball hits the gound, FC is hit so hard that his head pops off and roles to a stop at the feet of the backjudge. The hit is other wise legal in all respects.

ANSWER; according to some... legal play.

I respectfully disagree.

parepat - the original play was concerning a free kick. So if the kick has gone ten yards and been grounded, then K has just as much right to possess the ball as R. How long are you going to protect R?

I also agree that on a scrimmage kick, you are not going to let K blast the person who signalled a microsecond after it touches the ground.

Does R's protection end after R muffs the ball on a scrimmage kick?

I agree with you that it is a much tougher sell on a free kick. However, my point is, and has been, that there is nothing in the rules that tells us when the protection ends. Also, there is certainly nothing in the rules that differentiates protection between a free and scrimmage kick.

I wonder if the NCAA more clearly defines the duration of the protection on a fair catch.

REPLY: parepat...you're correct that nothing in the Federation rules explicitly says when the receiver's protection ends. Conversely, the NCAA rules do say that the protection ends when the kick touches the ground.

I believe that's the way it intended to be interpreted in Federation code as well. If not, wouldn't the receivers have a distinct unfair advantage in pursuing a kick that either team could legally possess, i.e. a free kick beyond R's restraining line or a scrimmage kick that has been touched by R beyond the NZ?

I believe that this is the reason that R's protection ends when a fair catch is no longer possible. Just my opinion.

I was kidding about the definition of a "ball-in-flight". But, the fair catch calling R is afforded protection only while the ball is in the air. (dont over complicate the rule) Once the ball hits the ground, protection for him ends. But, he cannot get involved in the play since the FC signal nullifies his involvement. And since the ball has traveled at least ten yards in the air and hit the ground, it is a grounded ball which can be recovered by K and R.

For a free kick, this discussion is pretty theoretical since no one will have the time to keep watching a player who signals but does not catch the free kick. The mechanics are there for a scrimmage kick, but for a free kick that can be recovered by K you best be watching to see who ends up with the ball.

By involvement, you mean he can't block anyone until the kick ends. But he sure can try to get the ball.