The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 06, 2009, 09:22pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,645
runner down exception

During scrimmage play, A1 places the ball on the ground for an ostensible place kick, but then leaves the ball in its place on the ground while arising, and pretends to bootleg away with the ball. Meanwhile A2, the ostensible kicker, advances, scoops the ball off the ground and dives forward. At the moment A1 took his hand off the ball, A1 had a knee on the ground.

Is the ball dead or alive in Fed, NCAA, and FC?

Robert in the Bronx
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 06, 2009, 10:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 289
Why am I thinking he ("holder") must arise with the ball for it to remain alive?
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 06, 2009, 11:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,538
The exception under NF: 4.2.2.a, to a live ball becoming dead, "When a runner.....allows any part of his person other than hand or foot to touch the ground" allows "the place kick holder with his knee(s) on the ground with a teammate in kicking position to catch or recover the snap while his knee(s) is on the ground and "places the ball for a kick, or if he rises to advance, hand kick or pass".

The exception does not allow him to "place the ball on the ground", so his doing so would not be covered by the "Exception" and the ball would be dead because his knee was on the ground while he was in possession of a live ball.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 01:34am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 178
Being in Massachusetts, we use NCAA rules:

"Exception: the ball remains alive when an offensive player has simulated a kick or is in position to kick the ball held for a place kick by a teammate. the ball may be kicked passed or advanced by rule."

I can't comment on the Fed exception, but I don't see an NCAA problem with the original post's scenario.

Leaving it on the ground for the kicker to scoop up is OK I believe. the only possible infraction might be Planned Loose Ball play. but that applies only to "the vicinity of the snapper." and with the holder being seven yards behind the snapper, Planned Loose Ball wouldn't apply in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 08:29am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,130
NCAA and NFHS differ on this subject.

NCAA the holder can handle the ball from his knees. Think it was a game with Louisville and somebody two seasons ago where the holder took the snap on his knee and flipped it over his shoulder to the kicker who ran around end for the score.

The same play under NFHS the ball is dead. The holder could keep it alive by rising.
__________________
Ed Hickland, MBA, CCP
ehicklan@optonline.net

Last edited by Ed Hickland; Sat Feb 07, 2009 at 08:43am.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 08:49am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Hickland View Post
NCAA and NFHS differ on this subject.

NCAA the holder can handle the ball from his knees. Think it was a game with Louisville and somebody two seasons ago where the holder took the snap on his knee and flipped it over his shoulder to the kicker who ran around end for the score.

The same play under NFHS the ball is dead. The holder could keep it alive by rising.
And I had it twice this year, once in a varsity game. I blew it dead as the white hat and had to go to the sidelines to explain the difference (essentially). And the coach didn't believe me and then went out and probably rated me very low for my "lack of knowledge of the rules." A broken system if there ever was one.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 09:05am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,538
Especially in a High School football game, being right, isn't always what it's cracked up to be, and the sense of knowing that you were correct often provides very lonely comfort.

That's one of the primary reasons the "crew" should stop somewhere together after the game to properly complete the "officiating experience".
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 09:56am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmc View Post
Especially in a High School football game, being right, isn't always what it's cracked up to be, and the sense of knowing that you were correct often provides very lonely comfort.

That's one of the primary reasons the "crew" should stop somewhere together after the game to properly complete the "officiating experience".
And that involves beer, greasy food, beer, conversation, and beer.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 11:00am
Ref Ump Welsch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN View Post
And that involves beer, greasy food, beer, conversation, and beer.
And a hot-looking waitress ala Daisy Duke.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 11:05am
Ref Ump Welsch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Hickland View Post
NCAA the holder can handle the ball from his knees. Think it was a game with Louisville and somebody two seasons ago where the holder took the snap on his knee and flipped it over his shoulder to the kicker who ran around end for the score.
It was LSU who pulled this during the 2007 season. Bo Pelini was their defensive coordinator, and brought the play with him to Nebraska, and tried it against Colorado, damn near costing them the game.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 12:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmc View Post
The exception under NF: 4.2.2.a, to a live ball becoming dead, "When a runner.....allows any part of his person other than hand or foot to touch the ground" allows "the place kick holder with his knee(s) on the ground with a teammate in kicking position to catch or recover the snap while his knee(s) is on the ground and "places the ball for a kick, or if he rises to advance, hand kick or pass".

The exception does not allow him to "place the ball on the ground", so his doing so would not be covered by the "Exception" and the ball would be dead because his knee was on the ground while he was in possession of a live ball.
That's what I thought, but it seems funny when you consider instead the situation where, instead of deliberately leaving the ball on the ground (which doesn't meet the Fed or NCAA definition of "pass", BTW), he simply loses control of the ball after placing it for the ostensible kick and play proceeds more or less as previously described, maybe without the bootleg fake.

And now consider the situation where he catches the snap with at least one knee on the ground and then fumbles before he can place it for a kick or arise to continue play elsewise.

So in cx with those other cases, I'm not so sure about the ball's being dead if it's intentionally left loose on the ground. In that case, we've seen that he never intended to do any of the things listed in the exception, but the rule seems not to depend on his intention -- it says "places...or rises" rather than "intends to place...or rise". But then if you don't rule on his intention, it would seem the ball would have to be dead in the last case I brought up -- fumbling with knee down before the ball is placed -- and does anyone want to rule it dead in that situation? So it calls into question the rules committee's intent, which casts doubt on the case I first set forth.

Robert in the Bronx

Last edited by Robert Goodman; Sat Feb 07, 2009 at 12:28pm.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 01:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmc View Post
The exception under NF: 4.2.2.a, to a live ball becoming dead, "When a runner.....allows any part of his person other than hand or foot to touch the ground" allows "the place kick holder with his knee(s) on the ground with a teammate in kicking position to catch or recover the snap while his knee(s) is on the ground and "places the ball for a kick, or if he rises to advance, hand kick or pass".

The exception does not allow him to "place the ball on the ground", so his doing so would not be covered by the "Exception" and the ball would be dead because his knee was on the ground while he was in possession of a live ball.

Of course it does. You do not have to use a tee, the holder can hold the ball on the ground for it to be kicked. What Ed is describing is simply a variation of the fumblerooski which is illegal under NFHS rules.
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 03:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
And now consider the situation where he catches the snap with at least one knee on the ground and then fumbles before he can place it for a kick or arise to continue play elsewise.

So it calls into question the rules committee's intent, which casts doubt on the case I first set forth.

Robert in the Bronx
Robert, NF: 2.18 describes the "official" definition of a fumble, which does not include purposefully placing, or dropping, a ball on the ground. The exception to 4.2.2.a, does provide guidance for a muffed snap or "fumble". The exception's intent seems pretty evident, in that it provides for an inadvertent loss of possession (fumble) or unsuccessful attempt to secure possession (muff), but does not cover any deliberate or intentional placing of the ball on the ground.

Consider, however, that the potential placekick holder would normally be a minimum of 5 yards behind the LOS, so there is little, if any whatsoever, potential benefit of a player picking up a ball left, 5 or more yards behind the line, trying to dive through defenders converging on the exact spot where the ball was left.

I know there is always a possibility, but this scenario even questions that.

A "planned loose ball infraction" is not applicable as NF 7.3.8 describes the infraction as, "Any A player on his line of scrimmage may not advance a planned loose ball in the vicinity of the snapper."
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 07:01pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by daggo66 View Post
Of course it does. You do not have to use a tee, the holder can hold the ball on the ground for it to be kicked. What Ed is describing is simply a variation of the fumblerooski which is illegal under NFHS rules.
Let's go a step further.

Ball is snapped to the holder, unable to field the ball it bounds off his hands to the potential kicker who grabs it and runs for a touchdown. Legal?

Or, ball is snapper to the holder who bats the ball backwards to the potential kickerwho runs for a touchdown. Legal?

What is the rule?
__________________
Ed Hickland, MBA, CCP
ehicklan@optonline.net
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 07:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 289
Iíve got legal on both.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help: Disagreement on numbering exception ljudge Football 12 Mon Oct 09, 2006 11:28am
Another Momentum Exception Ed Hickland Football 5 Tue Aug 22, 2006 01:46pm
Religion Exception Zebra29 Football 10 Thu Oct 27, 2005 07:34am
Momentum exception or not? keystoneref Football 42 Tue Aug 31, 2004 06:51am
Rule 4-2-2 exception. Mike Simonds Football 3 Mon Sep 23, 2002 09:58pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:40pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1