One more play
 

Fourth and 10 from K's 20. K85 muffs the snap. R75 dives for the ball at K's 6 yard line and bats it into and out the back of the EZ. What do you have?

Touchback,
K's ball at opposite 20.

R caused the force necessary to put the ball out of play, your basic spot for the back of the endzone is the 20; since R's batt caused the new force to put the ball out of the endzone they are "punished"

I had this exact play 2 years ago in Varsity game. I remember a long discussion on this forum about it but the consensus was the previously mentioned outcome. I don't have my books handy for references but if anyone has it please post... FYI our crew totally got it wrong, bad, and I have since left that crew.

There is a little more to it.

I think it all depends if K85's muff of the snap was grounded or not. If the muff went straight up in the air and R75 batted it before it was grounded, it would not be considered a new force (2-13-3, 8-5-1) and the result would be a safety. If the muff was grounded first, then the result of the play would be a touchback, K's ball 1st and 10 from their 20.

Touchback, K 1/10 @ 20. Penalty for illegal batting is a spot foul.

No safety due to illegal batting,

There are a couple of considerations here - first, as Fedex mentioned, is whether the ball was grounded. If not, then no new force is possible and it will be a saftey. Second, if the ball was grounded, a new force MAY be imparted from a muff. If the ball was rolling towards the endline before the muff by B, then I'd the force still was from the snap. If the ball was completely at rest, then maybe you have a new force. If it's bouncing around, it's a judgement call but remember who's mistake caused this situation. Don't reward A's screw up with a 1&10 at the 20 unless you are absolutely, positively sure that B imparted the force. Anything less than 100% sure, call it a saftey.

REPLY: I agree with all of the principles that Jim D. mentions. But still remember that once that snap is grounded, the bat by B is illegal and still must be dealt with

Big Ump...illegal batting is a spot foul in only two cases and this ain't one of 'em:
(1) when it is by the offense behind the basic spot, or
(2) anyone want to guess the other one?

Bob's comment is correct. Even though the play mentioned a "bat", I pictured it as a "muff" which makes this a good place to discuss the differences between the two.

If a ball is loose and B is trying to recover it, he is likely to muff the ball (touching it in an unsuccessful attempt to recover). He could also bat the ball (intentionally slapping or stricking the ball with the arm or hand) - most likely in an attempt to prevent A's recovery. Make sure you don't flag B's muff as a bat when B touches the ball intentionally in an attempt to secure possession. In this situation, you have to read the play and judge B's intention - was he trying to recover the ball himself (muff) when he struck it or was he trying to knock the ball away from A (bat).

Let's say it was a BAT. Then what???? That was where I was going with this play. What is the enforcement of the batting penalty?

REPLY: Correct Jim...and what I was trying to drive home is this: The comment in your original post about not 'rewarding' A with a TB on a marginal ruling of a new force by B is great. But once B fouls, I think the scales begin to tip in the other direction and you don't want to reward B. That batting foul needs to be flagged in order to prevent that. Do you see what I was getting at? I didn't explicitly say it above.

During games, I tend to always remind myself that penalties for fouls by the defense are always enforced from the basic spot and rarely, if ever, enforced from the spot of the foul. The penalty for illegal batting should be enforced from previous spot since this is a loose ball play (snap).

My result is that K will accept the penalty for R's illegal bat and take the ball 1&10 @ the K-35. Clock on the snap.

I understand. I agree that a foul by B changes the dynamics.

That is what I was getting at with the original question. Good comments on other stuff along the way.

REPLY: Has anyone thought of the other time when an illegal bat could be a spot foul? First clue...it's probably something kooky.

The only thing I can come up with would be R illegally batting the ball behind the end of the kick (PSK spot). R catches the kick at R's 20 and fumbles the ball. To avoid K recovering at the 5, R bats the ball. The spot of the foul would be the enforcement spot.

NCAA: flag the batting, but technically, Team A has the choice of Touchback, so first and ten at the 20, or enforce the 15 yard batting penalty from the previous spot, though it isn't an auto first down. They'll accept the latter.

Am I missing something?

I think I have 2 of them Bob.

1) The passing team batting a backwards pass forwards. The BS would be the PS and the foul would be behind the BS, thus a spot foul.

2) A player bats forward a ball in possession of one of his teammates. This would be a spot foul ONLY if it the IB occurred behind the NZ. If that was the case the fumble would result in this being a loose ball play with the BS being the PS and the foul was by A behind the BS and thus the spot of the foul would be the enforcement spot.

It is not an automatic 1st down in NF either, but I don't know the last time a 15 yard PS enforcement did not give a team a first down, although it could happen.

In looking at the rule book, Rule 9-7-4 states ..A ball in player possession shal not be batted forward by a player of the team in possession. This would seem to describe a player in possession (the runner) batting the ball forward to a teammate. Like an illegal forward pass except it was an illegal bat. If this occurred beyond the neutral zone I would imagine this would be enforced as a spot foul. That would sure be a goofy looking play.

GH:cool:

That was what I was referring to in my number (2) above.

When it's by R in a PSK situation and the bat is behind the PSK spot.

The original situation is neat because whether or not the ball has hit ground is important for TWO reasons: first, as pointed out, because no new force can be added to a pass in flight (and a long snap is a backward pass) - thus the result of the play might change. Second, the bat is illegal if the snap has hit the ground, but legal if it has not.

So there won't be any judgement regarding force involved on the original play. Either the snap never hit the ground and the play results in a safety with no fouls, or the snap was grounded and no one will care about the result of the play, because the illegal bat produces A 1/10 @ A35.

REPLY: Jim D. and Roamin' Ump got the one I was thinking of. Like I said, "It is Probably Something Kooky."

Classic clue Bob!!! Classic!!

Bob'll be here all night folks, make sure you tip your servers!:D

Canadian Ruling
 

CANADIAN RULING:

Last touched rule 1-10-5 gives Team R the ball, 1D/G at the K-6.

From reading the US applications for the past few years, I know that PSK is Post Scrimmage Kick! :D :D