Nit picking on a field goal question

[sj]

NCAA.....

SECTION 4. Field Goal
How Scored
ARTICLE 1. a. A field goal shall be scored for the kicking team if a drop
kick or place kick passes over the crossbar between the uprights of the
receiving team’s goal before it touches a player of the kicking team or the
ground. The kick shall be a scrimmage kick but may not be a free kick.

b. If a legal field goal attempt passes over the crossbar between the uprights and is dead beyond the end line or is blown back but does not return
over the crossbar and is dead anywhere, it shall score a field goal. The
crossbar and uprights are treated as a line, not a plane, in determining
forward progress of the ball.

NFHS.....

8-4-1. A field goal shall be scored as follows...

c. The kicked ball shall pass between the vertical uprights or the inside of the uprights extended and above the crossbar of the opponents goal.

The NFHS casebook 8.4.1A-b says... The field goal attempt (b) is clearly over the crossbar between the uprights. RULING: It is a legal field goal.


************************

My question is this. Are these two rules saying different things? Or do they both mean that the entire ball has to go past the crossbar or does just part of the ball have to be over the crossbar?

In another situation concerning avoiding safety's a team must get the entire ball out of the end zone. What principle is applied here? The entire ball or just part of the ball?

Picking nits I guess but it's one of those once in a lifetime plays that you still have to be ready for.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Case Book play 8-4-1-a's language implies that it is to be treated the same as a ball in possession breaking the plane of the goal line, so any part of the ball breaking the plane of the crossbar between the uprights would be considered a successful field goal.

..."it is an unsuccessful attempt because the ball did not penetrate the plane of the goal between the inside of the uprights extended."

On a side note - the way that NCAA rule reads, a ball that is blown back over the crossbar and between the uprights after passing through that area is not a successful try/field goal. Interesting.

[AndrewMcCarthy]

I'll bite on this one.

I have no idea what the answer is but I would rule that the entire ball must pass the entire crossbar for the FG to be good.

My logic in this is that you could have the ball hit the crossbar (happens all the time) with part of it "through" the goal (the ball is bigger than the bar plus it's a funny shape, remember) and bounce back into the end zone. Imagine the ball coming to rest (balancing) on the crossbar with one point beyond it and one over the end zone then falling back into the end zone. I would never rule this to be good- would you??

For your safety question the entire ball must be entirely in the field of play to avoid the safety. If any part of the ball is over any part of the goal line it is in the end zone- same for touchdown as it is for safety.

[BigFarns]

Originally Posted by AndrewMcCarthy

I'll bite on this one.

I have no idea what the answer is but I would rule that the entire ball must pass the entire crossbar for the FG to be good.

My logic in this is that you could have the ball hit the crossbar (happens all the time) with part of it "through" the goal (the ball is bigger than the bar plus it's a funny shape, remember) and bounce back into the end zone. Imagine the ball coming to rest (balancing) on the crossbar with one point beyond it and one over the end zone then falling back into the end zone. I would never rule this to be good- would you??

For your safety question the entire ball must be entirely in the field of play to avoid the safety. If any part of the ball is over any part of the goal line it is in the end zone- same for touchdown as it is for safety.

I don't agree with you on the question of avoiding the safety. I don't have my books on me right now...I'll grab them when I get home....but I'm almost certain that forward progress is the foremost tip of the ball and if that foremost tip in past the plane of the goaline and in the field of play then the ballcarriers forward progress is NOT stopped in the end zone and therefore not a safety. Then when placing the ball I'm again almost certain that since no part of the ball can be in the endzone that the offense is "given" the few inches to make the back part of the ball get out of the endzone. Again I will get my books as soon as I get home cause these "once in a lifetime" situations are what makes reading the rulebook fun.

[Theisey]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

Case Book play 8-4-1-a's language implies that it is to be treated the same as a ball in possession breaking the plane of the goal line, so any part of the ball breaking the plane of the crossbar between the uprights would be considered a successful field goal.

..."it is an unsuccessful attempt because the ball did not penetrate the plane of the goal between the inside of the uprights extended."

On a side note - the way that NCAA rule reads, a ball that is blown back over the crossbar and between the uprights after passing through that area is not a successful try/field goal. Interesting.

The NF does not do a very good job on this rule. There are two "planes", the vertical plane of the crossbar and the vertical plane above the inside edge of the uprights.
All the rule says is the ball as to pass between them. You don't pass between them unless you have gone beyond these planes.

The case book then provides an interpretation, highly unlikely in my opinion of a ball that has passed beyond and is blow back as being good.
I can accept that.
However, I see no way by rule can you rule that a FG would is good if it hits any of the goal posts and rebounds into the EZ as the ball was never (fully)past these planes.

I much prefer the NCAA description and intrepretations even on a wind situation.

[AndrewMcCarthy]

Originally Posted by BigFarns

I don't agree with you on the question of avoiding the safety. I don't have my books on me right now...I'll grab them when I get home....but I'm almost certain that forward progress is the foremost tip of the ball and if that foremost tip in past the plane of the goaline and in the field of play then the ballcarriers forward progress is NOT stopped in the end zone and therefore not a safety. Then when placing the ball I'm again almost certain that since no part of the ball can be in the endzone that the offense is "given" the few inches to make the back part of the ball get out of the endzone. Again I will get my books as soon as I get home cause these "once in a lifetime" situations are what makes reading the rulebook fun.

For forward progress, the ball is where the ball is. I believe you're thinking about when the ball is turned "sideways". To spot the ball for play you have to keep the back end where it was and the offense gains a few inches when you turn the ball to place it.

[waltjp]

I'll vote for the entire ball passing between the uprights for the kick to be good. Someone posted link to a play last season that showed a long field goal attempt that hit the cross bar and bounced straight up and back onto the crossbar 3 times before falling into the end zone. I don't think anyone claimed that the kick should have been good.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by waltjp

I'll vote for the entire ball passing between the uprights for the kick to be good. Someone posted link to a play last season that showed a long field goal attempt that hit the cross bar and bounced straight up and back onto the crossbar 3 times before falling into the end zone. I don't think anyone claimed that the kick should have been good.

They should have. By rule, technically, if the field and uprights were properly marked and aligned, that would be a successful field goal, as the cylindrical front edge of the crossbar and uprights should be directly over and in line with the inside edge of the end line (1-2-5-a). The front edge of the cross bar is where the all-important "plane" is that must be penetrated by the ball.

Look at the language in Case Book play 8-4-1-a and in Rule 8-2-1-a - they both use the word "penetrate." It's the same principle, with regard to the ball and the related plane, for scoring a touchdown and a successful field goal or try.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

They should have. By rule, technically, if the field and uprights were properly marked and aligned, that would be a successful field goal, as the cylindrical front edge of the crossbar and uprights should be directly over and in line with the inside edge of the end line (1-2-5-a). The front edge of the cross bar is where the all-important "plane" is that must be penetrated by the ball.

Look at the language in Case Book play 8-4-1-a and in Rule 8-2-1-a - they both use the word "penetrate." It's the same principle, with regard to the ball and the related plane, for scoring a touchdown and a successful field goal or try.

I disagree. The case book play you reference uses 'penetrate' to illustrate that the ball wasn't completely inside the upright, but instead passed over the upright.

Rule 8-4-1c states that the ball "shall pass between the vertical uprights ... and above the crossbar"

"Pass" is the important word here - meaning 'to move in a path so as to approach and continue beyond something'. A ball bouncing on a crossbar has not continued beyond it.

[AndrewMcCarthy]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

They should have.

Or perhaps they didn't want that to be their last game.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Theisey

The NF does not do a very good job on this rule. There are two "planes", the vertical plane of the crossbar and the vertical plane above the inside edge of the uprights.
All the rule says is the ball as to pass between them. You don't pass between them unless you have gone beyond these planes.

The case book then provides an interpretation, highly unlikely in my opinion of a ball that has passed beyond and is blow back as being good.
I can accept that.
However, I see no way by rule can you rule that a FG would is good if it hits any of the goal posts and rebounds into the EZ as the ball was never (fully)past these planes.

I much prefer the NCAA description and intrepretations even on a wind situation.

I like the NCAA rule better also.