Psk
 

Under the national federation rules if K1 the kicker is given a cheap shot personal foul after he punts, but [B]he is still behind the line of scrimage but before the kick is caught. Do you mark it off from the end of the kick and first down R or from the los and first K? I think it is from the los and K keeps the ball what is your input?

One of the requirements for PSK is that the foul occurs beyond the expanded neutral zone. The kick hasn't ended so this is a loose ball play. The penalty is enforced from the previous spot.

Walt's got it nailed. There are several requirements needed before a foul is considered a PSK, including where the foul takes place. Give that rule an extra look, and know it inside and out, it can save you on the field.

Canadian Ruling
 

CANADIAN RULING:

Unnecessary Roughness against the kicker with the ball in the air is applied from PLS, PP, or PBD, at K's option. If the kicker is no longer a kicker, then the options change to PP or PBD.

I'm going to split hairs and say that you need to know when he stops being a kicker. A player is a kicker until "he has had reasonable opportunity to regain his balance". If he gets a cheap shot, was it before or after he regained his balance? This determines if you have RTK or just a PF and whether you award an automatic first down or not. The foul is, as Walt points out, from the previous spot.

Canadian Ruling
 

On the Canadian Ruking, this depends on whether the kicker is still in the act of kicking. If the kicker's foot has returned to the ground then roughing the kicker can no longer apply.

So we are left with interference on the kicker or UR on the kicker (post kick). The former would be applied at PP while the later would be PP or PBD. Neither would be PLS though.

When I read the OP, I thought I saw the word "just". But I see that it is not there on re-read. My bad.

These are correct.

Exactly.The OP described the action as a 'cheap shot personal foul' so that's how I interpreted it, not RFK. The only difference is an award of an automatic first down. In either case you're enforcing from the previous spot.

Technically, and that would be very technically, you are correct. However, unless someone who has committed a "cheap shot" against an opponent who has kicked a ball, CLEARLY has done so LONG after the process of kicking has ended, doesn't seem a prudent time to split hairs about which foul was technically delivered.

RTK, the more serious infraction, seems the appropriate choice.

I don't necessarily agree or disagree but how about this one: A's QB delivers a pass and is immediately and flagrantly hit in the head by B1's forearm. RTP or PF?

RTP and, if flagrant, DQ.

The same logic would apply, unless the contact was well after the act of passing had been completed, I would consider the foul, Roughing the Passer, which provides the added penalty of an automatic First Down as well as possible enforcement from the end of the last run, when the pass is complete.

But by definition, RTP is "charging into a passer....after it is clear the ball has been thrown". So how can you call an immediate cheap shot roughing?

A passer in the act of passing, or having just passed is a defenceless player.

The NCAA Rules Committee in NCAA want passers to be protected, hence they wish anything cheap to be classed as RTP so that the harsher RTP enforcement (tacking the 15 onto the end of the gain of the pass is completed) might act as a deterrent.
Every clinic I have attended in the last few years has emphasised that White Hats should be especially vigilant for hits to the QB's head or hits using the helmet and call them RTP.

The RTP Rule wording differences between NCAA (who use "obvious the ball has been thrown") and Fed (who use "clear the all has been thrown") are very minor.
I only work Federation occasionally when on vacation in the US, but I can imagine their Rules Comittee would have a very similar philosophy (if not stricter and more protective) to the NCAA regarding how it should be called.

I Have no idea where you're trying to go with this. A better question might be, "How could you call an "immediate cheap shot" to anyone who is anywhere near involved in the process of passing, anything but roughing?"

The NF rules of the game identify a whole series of actions that are prohibited under Illegal Personal Contact (NF: 9.4), and then go on to add a unique penalty that applies to such contact when it is directed to a passer, ostensibly because of the added vulnerability of a player involved in the act of passing, and immediately thereafter. This appears to be an added prohibition deliberately limited to apply to a specific situation and intended to provide a specific deterent.

Exactly what I was thinking...

The original play talks about a cheap shot after the kick. You seemed to think that "very technically" I am correct on roughing the kicker so I'm asking you if you call an immediate cheap hit on a QB roughing or a PF when you consider the definition of RTP. You're willing to expand the definitions, I'm wondering if others do the same or where they draw the line. Personally, I've always thought it roughing but RTP seems to only involve late hits by the letter of the rule.

FED

2-32-8 . . . A kicker is any player who legally punts, drop kicks or place kicks. A player becomes a kicker when his knee, lower leg or foot makes contact with the ball. He continues to be the kicker until he has had reasonable opportunity to regain his balance or until after a free kick, he has advanced 5 yards

2-32-11 . . . A passer is a player who throws a legal forward pass. He continues to be a passer until the legal forward pass ends or until he moves to participate in the play.

Can someone answer if there's a similar NCAA or NFL definitions?

NCAA:

Kicker
ARTICLE 3. a. The kicker is any player who punts, drop kicks or place kicks according to rule. He remains the kicker until he has had a reasonable time to regain his balance.

Passer
ARTICLE 5. The passer is the player who throws a legal forward pass. He is a passer from the time he releases the ball until it is complete, incomplete or intercepted or he moves to participate in the play

I think we're saying the same basic thing. There is always some level of judgment involved in either (roughing the passer or kicker) call. If the foul is clearly separate from the act of either passing or kicking, then consideration of a simple PF is appropriate.

I've always understood that the added difference in penalty severity is an inducement to the defense to be additionally careful because of the increased vulnerability associated with the acts of passing and kicking. If the foul is judged to happen during that period of increased vulnerability, roughing seems like the appropriate choice.

When that "period" begins and ends is defined by rule, and subject to the judgment and interpretation of the calling official.

Just to be clear about what some are saying here, if just after release of the pass, a defender
a) takes one step in continuation of his rush to the QB and hits him in the chest, it's nothing.
b) takes one step in continuation of his rush to the QB and hits him in the head, it's RTP.

or am I mistaken about what some are saying?

If you're looking for a "silver bullet", I'm not sure one exists. Although, I think your (b) above might be as close to "always" as you can get, but in (a) all depends on what you see and whether you decide the contact was avoidable, significant, deliberate or reasonable.

Nothing nefarious or "silver bullety" about it. I'm merely looking for confirmation of what is being said. The examples given were for a stark visual of what it appeared was being said, that even though the timing of the hit was exactly the same on a passer, some are saying where the hit is made makes it either allowable or a RTP. Although I may myself make such a call, I'm not sure there is any rule support in doing so. Because some coaches do know the rules.
Coach "was your RTP call because the hit was late?"
Me "no, it was because your guy hit him in the head."
Coach "well I can maybe understand a personal foul there, but where in the rules does it say a hit to the head makes it roughing the passer?"
How are you going to answer that?

Here's where I'm coming from:

9-4-4 . . . Roughing the passer. Defensive players must make a definite effort to avoid charging into a passer, who has thrown the ball from in or behind the neutral zone, after it is clear the ball has been thrown.......

9-4-4 indicates it's roughing if he's hit "after it's clear the ball has been thrown". That's why I asked about the immediate cheap shot. Is that, by rule, RTP? Roughing seems to be really nothing more than a late hit. It makes a big difference in where the penalty is enforced (usually) and if you add an auto first down.

See, that's what I'm asking too. My examples assumed the timing of the hits would not generate a RTP. Instead, they were meant to question the "ruling" by some here that where the hit happens can still generate a RTP which I don't think can be supported by rule. We all know the hit to the head is a RTP in the NFL because we've seen it announced just about every Sunday, but that rule does not exist in NFHS.

It has nothing to do with timing. It doesn't matter if the ball was just released of if the QB is standing there watching the result of his 60-yard pass. He's still a passer until the pass ends. Rule 9-4-4 further clarifies this by saying if the QB is standing still or dropping back he still can't be roughed because he's not involved in the play.

Most teams are lucky to have 1 quarterback, let along a decent backup. Protect him.

An R who I have a lot of respect for once shared this with me -

If you have to think about whether it was pass interference or not, it wasn't.

If you have to think about whether it was roughing or not, it was.

Oh really? Timing has nothing to do with it? So if the passer has released the ball and a defender is close enough he can't avoid contact it's the same as a defender who takes 2 or 3 or 4 steps to hit him. Really? I guess that whole part of a defender having to make an effort to avoid contact is ignored then. Because timing doesn't matter.

You're really talking about the ridiculous now. Yeah, contact can't be avoided it's not a foul. Otherwise, throw the flag.

It is illegal to charge into the passer after the ball is clearly thrown.

9-4-4 further states that "No defensive player shall charge into the passer who is standing still or fading back, because he is considered out of the play after the pass"

Seems pretty clear, if the QB has thrown the ball and is standing there watching he can not be hit until the pass ends or he makes some other move to participate in the play.

The problem here is your first answer was simply incomplete. Had your answer been, "no, it was because your guy hit him in the head while he was still a passer", there shouldn't have been any more questions. The other indisputable factor is that the determination of what constitutes late is yours alone to make.

Anybody else is entitled to their opinion, but the judgment is your's alone to make.

For both Roughing the kicker, as well as roughing the passer, the rules clearly place the emphasis, the responsibility to avoid such contact on the defender. The defender is responsible to guage his charge to avoid such contact.

NF: 9.4 "Defensive players must make a definite effort to avoid charging into the passer."

NF:9.5 "A defensive player shall neither run into the licker or holder...not block, tackle or charge into the kicker....

Both rules allow for conditions that mitigate the responsibility, but the PRIMARY responsibility to avoid contact rests with the defense, who should completely understand that before initiating their charge.

No, the problem appears to be some people can't read or can't admit they made a mistake.
What does just after release of the ball mean to you? Unless the catch is made immediately after the release I don't know how anyone could reasonably not think the QB is still the passer.
What's even funnier is others who make statements that timing doesn't matter & even after it's shown yes it does, somehow I'm the one being ridiculous.

This was a fun thread to read.

From the original post sounds like a roughing call to me, of course, there could be a timing issue.

Forget quoting the rule book and use the space above the ears. A kicker becomes a kicker when the ball is legally kicked and until he regains his balance. Then comes the cheap shot.

Using the book for a moment, PSK requires the ball cross the expanded neutral zone and the foul is committed by R. Now how many times do coaches know exactly when the ball crosses the zone or really care, the answer is probably none.

Therefore, as long as the ball is high in the air and a cheap shot is put on the kicker I would have a roughing call. Fifteen yards and automatic 1st.

If the ball is on the ground or coming close to the ground and some enterprising player decides to do the kicker in sounds like unnecessary roughness enforced by rule as a PSK.

Judge the call by the tempo of the game. If the player cheap shots the kicker and his team is down 60-0, or, his team has been giving cheap shots all game, or, even, if the kicker has been playing a spectacular game and on and on, mete out the harshest penalty you can reasonably support be it roughing and automatic first to K or unnecessary roughness and 15 from the succeeding spot. Look for the motivation of the offending player.

REPLY: Ed, it's no longer a requirement that the foul by R take place after the kick has crossed the expanded neutral zone. It was in the original rule back in 2003. But they changed it in 2004. Now the foul can take place anytime between the snap and the end of the kick and still be a PSK foul as long as all the criteria are met. True, the kick must cross the ENZ, but not necessarily before the foul by R. And the foul must take place beyond the ENZ.

Mike, you seem intent on arguing facts that are not in dispute. Your comment about 'others' making statements about timing is clearly directed at me. Allow me to clear up any misunderstanding.

In no way did I mean to suggest that a defender should be penalized for roughing if he contacts the passer just as he's releasing the ball and contact is unavoidable.

I was directing my comment at the time after the ball is released. From the definitions if the ball is still in flight the QB or whoever threw the pass is still a passer (FED 2-32-11).

I hope this clears things up for you.

Thanks for that correction.