Another potential Illegal Participation play

[The Roamin' Umpire]

NFHS Rules (though I'd be curious to see NCAA as well):

PLAY: K 4/10 @ R-35. Punt formation, with player K99 lined up about 2 yards from the sideline. At the snap, K99 dodges around his defender by going OOB. He runs up the sideline (OOB the whole way), while the kick is made cleanly, hits near the sideline around the R-10 and bounces towards the end zone. K99 beats the ball there and is standing OOB at the R-1 when he bats the ball.

I believe this is a legal play. I believe it probably SHOULDN'T be, but I can't think of a reason why we'd have a flag. Thoughts?

[jhumm]

9-6-2
During the down, no player shall intentionally go out of bounds and return.

Illegal Participation. Sounds like he went out intentionally to me.

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by jhumm

9-6-2
During the down, no player shall intentionally go out of bounds and return.

Illegal Participation. Sounds like he went out intentionally to me.

He never returned. All this action was while he was OOB.

[nvfoa15]

jhumm,

The OP states that K99 goes OOB intentionally but does NOT return. Instead he stays OOB and touches the kick at the R-1 yard line. K99, being OOB, causes the ball to be OOB by his action. Rule 9-6-2 states that it is IP to intentionally go OOB AND RETURN. K99 did not return - looks like a loophole to me.

[With_Two_Flakes]

NCAA

Rule 6-3-12
No Team A player who goes out of bounds during a scrimmage kick down may return inbounds during the down (Exception: This does not apply to a Team A player who is blocked out of bounds and attempts to return inbounds immediately).
PENALTY -
Live-ball foul. Five yards from the previous spot [S19].

[nvfoa15]

Again, K99 did not return inbounds...

[With_Two_Flakes]

Originally Posted by nvfoa15

Again, K99 did not return inbounds...

D'Oh!
My bad - I need to take my time and read these things twice before I answer

This question gets nastier and nastier the more I think about it. Under NCAA rules, K99 hasn't even illegally touched it as he isn't inbounds.

Rule 6-3-2-a
No inbounds player of the kicking team shall touch a scrimmage kick that has crossed the neutral zone before it touches an opponent. Such illegal touching is a violation that, when the ball becomes dead, gives the receiving team the privilege of taking the ball at the spot of the violation.

The only thing I could think of (and it's a real stretch) would be

Rule 3-5-2-d
Substitutes who become players must remain in the game for one play....

although I'm sure the spirit of that Rule was not meant to cover such situations as this.

[jhumm]

Great play. Should have read it closer. Sorry for the obvious answer. I can't think of anything specific in the NFHS rule book, but it does seem like an illegal play.

[l3will]

K99 is out of bounds ...k99 remained out of bounds ... so here goes without rule reference or books.

1. K99 bats ball while ball is in bounds... illegal participation (he participated in the play by batting a live ball in the field of play)
2. K99 bats ball while ball is out of bounds or while kick is in the air above the sideline... ball is dead because the ball is out of bounds. R's ball at the out of bounds
spot.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by The Roamin' Umpire

PLAY: K 4/10 @ R-35. Punt formation, with player K99 lined up about 2 yards from the sideline. At the snap, K99 dodges around his defender by going OOB. He runs up the sideline (OOB the whole way), while the kick is made cleanly, hits near the sideline around the R-10 and bounces towards the end zone. K99 beats the ball there and is standing OOB at the R-1 when he bats the ball.

I believe this is a legal play. I believe it probably SHOULDN'T be, but I can't think of a reason why we'd have a flag. Thoughts?

CANADIAN RULING:

The Canadian ruling may be slightly more clear than the US text as it says "...may not further participate in that play...", meaning there is no restriction on where that player is standing for a flag to be warranted.

Penalty is 10 yards: B 1D/10 @ B-11.

If B wishes to restrict A's return, there are other ways to do it that if also violate rules, are only penalized by 5 yards, and don't require the accuracy and luck found in the OP's kick.

[wisref2]

Originally Posted by l3will

K99 is out of bounds ...k99 remained out of bounds ... so here goes without rule reference or books.

1. K99 bats ball while ball is in bounds... illegal participation (he participated in the play by batting a live ball in the field of play)
2. K99 bats ball while ball is out of bounds or while kick is in the air above the sideline... ball is dead because the ball is out of bounds. R's ball at the out of bounds
spot.

For #1 - he has the legal right to touch the ball. He is still a player, and any player may recover a loose ball. No different than a player sliding out of bound trying to recover the ball then touching it while he was out of bounds.

[l3will]

My thinking is that K99 chose to go out of bounds and he chose to stay out
of bounds... when he reaches back in to the field of play while still standing
out of bounds he violates the spirit of the rule. 9-6-2.

So what would you do... declare it dead at the one even though the kick would have crossed the goal line.?

Great play for thought...

I'd might even invoke 9-9-1...
A player or nonplayer or person not subject to the rules shall not hinder play
by an unfair act which has no specific coverage. In this case probably declare
it a touchback .

My thought, your opinion may vary

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by l3will

I'd might even invoke 9-9-1...
A player or nonplayer or person not subject to the rules shall not hinder play
by an unfair act which has no specific coverage.

I think to be an "unfair act", it has to be uncontroversially unfair, not just a questionable loophole that people would argue about. Other rule books refer to "obviously unfair" and "palpably unfair" (the original wording in the NCAA rules from which the USAn codes derived) acts, but I don't think Fed's omission of such a qualifier was meant to give the referee more leeway.

Robert

[l3will]

My preference would be to sell illegal participation in this case since K99 was
out of bounds a long time and took himself out of the play and by touching
the ball in the field of play... he participated.

2-30 Participation - Participation is any act or action by a player or non-player that has an influence on the play.

As I said, your opinion may vary

You may not agree until the lawyers at NFHS cover this situation explicitly,
but that is what I think.

You may award the ball to R at the one yard line, but I think that might be a
harder sell if the kick was clearly bouncing toward the goal line.

[Mike L]

Regarding the unfair question....are you going to allow R to block this guy while he's OOB? Because if you don't, you've given this player a free run down the field to make a play.