A ball on the A-32 4th & 7. A is set up in scrimmage kick formation. Ball snapped to punter A25 who recieves the snap at the A-26. He steps towards the LOS and then to aviod a big rush, throws a pass to reciever A88. He catches the ball at the A-30. A88 turns and punts the ball down field where it is downed at the B-29. After the kick (with his kicking leg in the air) B29 dives to block the punt and takes out the leg A88 was standing on and does NOT touch the ball.

clock, down, any penalities?

Canadian Ruling
 

A88 does not receive punting protection as he was not in an obvious kicking position and therefore no foul for contacting the kicker.

If in the judgement of the official it is unneceassry roughness, a flag could be thrown.

You did say that the dive was after the kick. To me, that very well could be unnecessary.

REPLY: There's one thing in particular in your description of the play that make me think a flag is warranted (NFHS, NCAA). You say that the defender "dives to block the punt " and then takes the kicker's plant leg out. This makes it abundantly clear that at least to the defender in question, it was obvious that a kick was being made. Therefore he is bound by running/roughing the kicker restrictions.

Assuming that you did call roughing, A's ball 1st and 10 from A's 47. Clock will start on the snap.

RTK AUTO 1ST DOWN

NCAA rules:
I don't have a book around so I have a few questions for anyone.
Can you have a scrimmage kick after a legal forward pass? For some reason this bothers me....
Also, is it leagally a scrimmage kick formation if the punter is 6 yards from the LOS? I think is has to be 7 yards - so there is no scrimmage kick formation. Not that this automatically removes protection from a kicker (if it is obvious he would kick) - just wanted to check.

James

Canadian Rules
 

In Canada, punters do not have protection if:

1. They are not in a normal kicking position.

2. They leave their kicking spot.

3. They make a motion to pass.

(Note also that in Canada, anyone can punt the ball anywhere on field including over the LOS or by the defence after a turnover.)

I too am bothered by the pass first.
Rule:2-23-4 states that the kick must initiate behind the neutral zone.
If the initial pass were backward:
1. Kicker is not protected but still a legal kick. May still be so if pass is forward, but kick occurs behind neutral zone, having not crossed and returned.
2. Kicker not protected in any case. Rule requires 7 yard horiz. sep from snapper. See rules for scrimmage kick formation.

REPLY: NoTrumpKing...I can see by your rules citation that you're talking Federation. For both NCAA and Federation, A25's legal forward pass to A88 makes the play unusual and certainly makes the decision on running/roughing more difficult for the R. But...the kick is still legal, and B is not completely absolved for all contact on A88 after the kick. B still needs to avoid contact if the kick is obvious. From the way the original post was written, B29 was diving "to block the punt." That makes it seem pretty clear that he knew a punt was coming. Therfore, he is liable for the contact against A88. And whether or not A88 was the deep man in a scrimmage kick formation is completely inconsequential. As a kicker, he still gets protection. I'm not sure what your #1 and #2 are getting at?

Bob:
If a kick is legal only if kicked in or behind the neutral zone, the forward pass must be completed in or behind the neutral zone and K11 must not cross & return.
I'm citing Federation, only because this is an exercise in hyperbolic hypotheticals.
If R were in a scrimmage kick formation, none of the rules governing numbering would apply; so, obviously some intellectual discipline applies to the approach we explore.
This is not a scrimmage kick formation; the act is a "quick kick" remminssant of old footbal. This is a loose ball play preceeding a run.
The judgement applied is whether or not B9 is committing a Personal Foul.
Most critically, we've conferred in a huddle of our own, on the field, in front of the fans and arrived at an enforceable decision, uniformly and universally supported. by the whole crew, each of us having been heard.
I also suspect we'll get our 15 minutes of fame from this and lots of flags & bags will be picked up off the grass.

Got here first Bob. OK No TrumpKing, Why must the pass be completed in or behind the neutral zone? Also what rule prevents A11 from retreated behind the LOS to kick the ball?
Take the following play:
A2 Kicks the ball down field where it is muffed by B1. The ball rebounds behind the LOS and is picked up by A2 who again kicks the ball. B1, having hands of brick, again muffs the ball, and it again rebounds behind the LOS where A2 again gains possession. This time he throws a pass two yards beyond the LOS to A87 who then makes a backwards pass to A2 who, for the third time in the down, kicks the ball downfield. The ball this time is fair caught by A2. (he's got better hands....)

BTW I agree with Bob's assessment. Since B29 is attempting to block the kick it IS apparent that a kick will be (has been) made and the kicker is awarded protection.

[Edited by Jim S on Dec 15th, 2005 at 09:15 PM]

Jim:
The only entropy I can imagine applying to the chaos you describe is having an inelligible receiver downfield. This "what-if" exceeds the bounds of planning, so it's a chaotic play. Ergo there will be an ineligible receiver dowfield.
A legal scrimmage kick occurs in or behind the neutral zone per 2-23-4. Intentionally striking the ball with the foot or the lower portion of the leg by any player beyond the neutral zone is illegal kicking.
In chaos there is opportunity; here the most appropriate opportunity is enforcing the most visible rule on a play as described, above. Flag'em for ineligible downfield.

REPLY: Let's get back to the original post. The kick <u><i>did</i></u> occur from behind the neutral zone. Just what criteria of a legal kick do you see not being satisfied? And why, since it was obvious to the offender that a kick would be made, do you choose to absolve him of responsibility for the late contact?

Re: Canadian Rules
 

I saw this on the last play of the Grey Cup this year. Now I know why it is not a foul. However, why would the QB choose to kick when he was in trouble? What could the offense do with a kick downfield that could possibly help his team?

Ah now there is the interesting part. Unlike American rules, when we punt, anyone onside (that is behind the ball when it is kicked, including the kicker) can go and recover the ball.

Also, if you kick the ball in the EZ you get one point. Which means sometimes you need to kick the ball back out of the end zone to avoid giving up a point!

Bob,
You are absolutely correct. I missed that he received the pass at the 30. It is a legal kick. I don't absolve the defender of responsibility for the contact. I merely defer to the wing-official on the line to make the judgement call.
By definition a scrimmage kick formation requires the kicker to be at least 7 yards removed from the snapper with no other player in position to take a direct snap. Since this is not a kick formation, certain reservations, exceptions and other protections don't attach. For example the snapper isn't afforded protection because the recipient of the snap is only 6 yards deep.
The kicker was not in a kicking position: at, immediately proximate to, or after the snap, except as he kicked the bal. If he took no steps forward, merely swung his leg to make contact, there is also no action simulating a kick, nor is there any action preparatory to making a kick as is customarily seen.
Sooooooooooo - was the defender behaving within the limits of football and demonstrating the techniques associated with properly and legitimately playing his position on defense, and was contact unavoidable?