Punt blocked question

[3bag9er]

Here is a question posed to me by a coach:

Situation:4th at 5

K is punting, R blocks the kick at the line of scrimmage, the ball is falls behind the line of scrimmage. R attempts to recover the blocked punt, in the process kicks the ball forward and is recovered by K 7 yards down field which would make it enough yardage for K to get a first down...

What do you think it is... I know I know what is the odds... Is it 1st and 10 K at the recovered spot or 1st and 10 R...

Let me know,,,

Niner

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by 3bag9er

Here is a question posed to me by a coach:

Situation:4th at 5

K is punting, R blocks the kick at the line of scrimmage, the ball is falls behind the line of scrimmage. R attempts to recover the blocked punt, in the process kicks the ball forward and is recovered by K 7 yards down field which would make it enough yardage for K to get a first down...

What do you think it is... I know I know what is the odds... Is it 1st and 10 K at the recovered spot or 1st and 10 R...

CANADIAN RULING:

If R's kick is intentional, when K recovers, a new series shall be awarded because the continuity of downs was broken upon R's intentional kick.

If R's kick is not intentional, when K recovers, a new series shall be awarded be K reached the line to gain.

[Jim D]

Rule 6-2-4 Any kicker may catch or recover a scrimmage kick:
1)while it is beyond the neutral zone - OK, THAT HAPPENS ON THIS PLAY
2) Provided such kick has been touched by a receiver who was clearly beyond the neutral zone at the time of touching - THAT DIDN"T HAPPEN ON THIS PLAY, R didn't touch it downfield.

Therefore K can't keep the ball. 1st & 10 for R where K downed the ball.

[Kirby]

Originally Posted by Jim D

Rule 6-2-4 Any kicker may catch or recover a scrimmage kick:
1)while it is beyond the neutral zone - OK, THAT HAPPENS ON THIS PLAY
2) Provided such kick has been touched by a receiver who was clearly beyond the neutral zone at the time of touching - THAT DIDN"T HAPPEN ON THIS PLAY, R didn't touch it downfield.

Therefore K can't keep the ball. 1st & 10 for R where K downed the ball.

Agree.

[Mike L]

and at that point all you have to determine was R's kick intentional (which I guess is redundant according the to definition of "kick", but you get what I mean).

[3bag9er]

Originally Posted by Mike L

and at that point all you have to determine was R's kick intentional (which I guess is redundant according the to definition of "kick", but you get what I mean).

Well thank you fellas, I thought so, but had to ask all of you...

So from the Sunflower State of Kansas, good luck to you all this year!

[dvasques]

Originally Posted by Jim D

Rule 6-2-4 Any kicker may catch or recover a scrimmage kick:
1)while it is beyond the neutral zone - OK, THAT HAPPENS ON THIS PLAY
2) Provided such kick has been touched by a receiver who was clearly beyond the neutral zone at the time of touching - THAT DIDN"T HAPPEN ON THIS PLAY, R didn't touch it downfield.

Therefore K can't keep the ball. 1st & 10 for R where K downed the ball.

Beyond the neutral zone actually means behind the line?
My understanding was that a blocked kick could be recovered and advanced by K had it not crossed the line due to a block. My understanding is that screwed?

[Warrenkicker]

Beyond the neutral zone is on the defense's or return team's side of the ball. Behind the neutral zone is on the offense's or kicking team's side of the ball. In the neutral zone is the length of the ball.

So in this play K did recover the ball beyond the neutral zone, 7 yards down field. However since R touched the ball in or behind the expanded neutral zone, blocked at the line of scrimmage, it does not result in K retaining possession where they recovered it. K only downed the kick. R's ball at the spot of K's recovery.

[CO ump]

Originally Posted by Jim D

Rule 6-2-4 Any kicker may catch or recover a scrimmage kick:
1)while it is beyond the neutral zone - OK, THAT HAPPENS ON THIS PLAY
2) Provided such kick has been touched by a receiver who was clearly beyond the neutral zone at the time of touching - THAT DIDN"T HAPPEN ON THIS PLAY, R didn't touch it downfield.

Therefore K can't keep the ball. 1st & 10 for R where K downed the ball.

On the surface this makes sense. But something seems out of whack.
R blocks kick and ball remains behind neutral zone, at this point either team can recover and advance. R then muffs(I'm assuming an unintentional kick)
the ball, creating a new force which moves ball beyond neutral zone where only R can recover and advance.

I think 6-2-4 only applies if the kick or K is the force that took ball beyond the neutral zone.
It doesn't seem right that Rs muffing should prevent K from posession.
Is this indeed the intent ofthe rule? I'm looking for input.

[don't move]

Force is only an issue as it relates to the goal line.

[CO ump]

Originally Posted by don't move

Force is only an issue as it relates to the goal line.

I realize that.
My question is:
Do you think rule 6-2-4 intended to penalize K for Rs muff in this situation?
It was clearly Rs muff that took the ball from a zone where K could recover and advance to a zone where K could not retain posession.

Where else in the rules can a muff by the team not in posession have such advantageous results?

[don't move]

You can 'what if' the rules ad nauseam. In my 37 years officiating, I have never seen anything remotely close to the described play. If it happened occasionally, the NF rules committee might see fit amend the rule. Until then, we will just have to live with the perceived inequity.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by CO ump

On the surface this makes sense. But something seems out of whack.
R blocks kick and ball remains behind neutral zone, at this point either team can recover and advance. R then muffs(I'm assuming an unintentional kick)
the ball, creating a new force which moves ball beyond neutral zone where only R can recover and advance.

True, new force or impetus which could come up in a safety/touchback determination. But the way the rules are written defining "kick", K's kick did not end until it came into player possession.

But this is not such a bad hosing as you might think. K tried to kick the ball to beyond the neutral zone, but they got it blocked. So then they got a little gift of field position by R's accidentally kicking the ball. The greater gyp is the rule since IIRC 1930 that makes both teams eligible for possession of the ball behind K's line, that can turn a blocked kick into an advantage.

Robert