Free Kick After Fair Catch w/no time left?
 

I know in the NFL, the recieving team can request a free kick after FC with no time left on the clock. How about NFHS rule on this. I know you can attempt w/ a tee in NFHS, but what about if the fair catch occurs with no time left on the clock. Can the half/game be extended by the team wanting to attempt the free kick. (I am a baseball official, but I kick in a semi-pro football league, and wanted to know the rule in case it ever came up.)

There is no provision for extending the half or game under NFHS rules for that scenario. 3.3.3. If you are playing semi-pro aren't you using NFL rules?

We used NFL rules last year. SInce most of our crews are HS crews from the area, there was some confusion on rule difference, calls were being enforced differently by different crews. So this year, they decided to revert to HS rules with a few NFL modifications, such as the runner has to be down by contact and kickoff from the 30, we also have a 2 minute warning. Thank you for the clarification on the time extension.

If there's a flag for KCI and R takes an awarded FC on the last timed down of the period, a FK could be attempted during the untimed down.

If a FC or a awarded FC occurred, the offense accepted a defensive penalty following the 1st down play and time expired, the offense could take a FK during the untimed down.

I'm not so sure about that. Why would they get an untimed down? Accepting the awarded FC doesn't provide for a replay of the down.

The awarding of a fair catch, as described in the above play is one of the penalty options available. Accepting the KCI penalty would offer the same provision, of an untimed down, as accepting any other foul committed during the last timed down of a period.

I don't necessarily agree since by accepting an "awarded" FC there is no replay provision. On what basis are you extending the period. Please provide references.

NFHS 6-5-6 Penalty R may accept a 15-yard penalty from the previous spot and the replay of the down or choose to accept the penalty of an awarded fair catch at the spot of the foul.

And, NFHS 3-3-3a A period must be extended by an untimed down if during the last timed down of the period, one of the following occurred: a. There was a foul by either team and the penalty is accepted, except for unsportsmanlike fouls, non-player fouls and fouls that specify a loss of down...

I've thought this through and it makes sense now. If they didn't get another play after the awarded fair catch and it was replayed instead, K wouldn't kick the ball.

I think you're still missing the point. BskBallRef,s started out with the presumption, "If there's a flag for KCI and R takes an awarded FC" . That means the penalty for the KCI was accepted, and the fouled team is entitled to an untimed down.

Because of the unique options associated with an accepted FCI penalty, R gets to choose if they wish to begin, their untimed down, either by a snap or a free kick. If they choose a free kick, it can score 3 points if goes over the cross bar between the uprights.

If there is a foul during that untimed down, R would be given another untimed down, after penalty enforcement and again, they would have the option to put the ball in play by either snap, or free kick.

Example: R is behind by 2 points. R chooses an awarded FC after K commits KCI at the 50 yard line, and time expires during the kick. R chooses to start an untimed down with a forward pass, that is complete to the "K" (now "B") 35 yard line, and "B" roughs the passer.

"R" (now "A") accepts the penalty for roughing, which brings the ball to the "B" 20 yard line, and entitles "A" to another untimed down. Because the next untimed down will be a repeat of a down for which "A" had the choice to snap or free kick, that choice continues to the next untimed down.

"A" can elect to free kick from the "B" 20 yard line. "B's" free kick line will be their own 10 yard line, and if the kick passes over the crossbar and between the uprights, "A" has earned 3 points and a win.

It would have been much easier to simply state that the only way you can have an "awarded" fair catch is by an accepted penalty, which forces extension.

The simplest explanation doesn't always get through the hardest of heads on Internet discussion boards. :)

NFL rules differ from NFHS on this subject. Following is a summary of NFL rules pertainining to fair catch on the last play of a period and extending the period. NFL Rule 4, Sec 3, Art 11 (g) & (h).

If time expired on the play and the receiver signals and makes a fair catch, receiving team may elect to extend with a fair-catch kick. There is no option to snap from scrimmage. If the first or third period is not extended the receivers may start the suceeding period with a snap or fair-catch kick.

If time expired on the play and receiver does not signal for a fair catch, and he is interfered with, the receiving team will be awarded a 15 yard penalty and an option to extend, but must put the ball in play by a snap from scrimmage.

If time expired on the play and receiver signals for a fair catch, and is interfered with, receiving team will be awarded a 15 yard penalty and has the option to extend with a fair-catch kick or may put the ball in play by a snap from scrimmage.

Can you help me accept your interpretation with reference to a rule? Looking at NF: 3.3.3 it states; "A period must be extended by an untimed down if duringthe last timed down of the period one of the following occured:

a. There was a foul be either team and the penalty is accepted, except for those fould listed in 3-3-4b (which lists the following):
1. USC
2. non-player fouls
3. fouls that specify loss of down, or
4. fouls that are enforced on the subsequent KO
as in Rule 8-2-2 (which relates to fouls
during a scoring play)

b. There was a double foul.
c. There was an inadvertent whistle.
d. If a TD was scored, the try is attempted.......

If (a), (b), (c) or (d)occurs during the untimed down, the procedure is repeated."

NF: 3.3.4 refers to when the period is NOT extended, much of which is a repetition of 3.3.3 from the opposite perspective.

The only reference I can find that would point to enforcing any of these penalties on the "subsequent" Kick Off is in the reference to NF: 8.2.2 which deals entirely with fould commited during a scoring play.

The "Penalty Section", under nf: 6.5 (Fair Catch) provides for the additional option of "accept the penalty of an awarded FC at the spot of the foul", for KCI, without any limitation as to when this option is available.

NF: 2.24.3 provides that, "A fee Kick is any legal kick which puts the ball in play........A free kick is used for a kickoff, for a kick following a safety, and is used if a free kick is chosen following a fair catch or awarded fair catch"

Could you direct me to where you found instructions that the option to choose a Free Kick, after enforcement of a KCI penalty is prohibited during the extension of any period by an untimed down. Thanks.

Ajmc, Notice I said NFL rules differ from NF rules. I was quoting the applicable NFL rules. The original post referred to NFL rules. This is
why I was pointing out the differences. Sorry if I misled.

I am a former futbol official so forgive me for asking a stupid question:

A number of years ago I was told that only under NFHS and NFL rules: If the Receiving team makes a fair catch of a punt, it could take a free kick (line up like a kick off to start the game) from the spot where the fair catch was made and either a) punt the ball, or b) kick the ball, that was held by another player, like for a field goal, and if in (b) the kick goes through the uprights it is three points for the kicking team.

Please remember this was many many years ago. So if one of the bald old geezers (I am a BOG on the Basketball Forum) of the Football Forum could give a history lesson, I would appreciate it very much. Thanks.

MTD, Sr.

I still have only a bald spot, but I've been working on it for over a decade. My bald spot is, however, football related. It was first mentioned by my father when I visited him in 1995, "You're going bald up here", but I didn't believe him, and couldn't see the thinning of the hair via mirrors. Several months later I spent a day in the sun at Mem. Stadium in Balto. watching a preliminary 10-a-side and then an international Rugby League game (USA vs. Canada), followed by the Stallions (CFL Colts) vs. Toronto Argonauts, twi-night. On the drive back north (to friends in Morristown NJ) it was a little chilly and I put on the heat. I then noticed the crown of my head throbbing when the hot air hit it. It took a while before I realized I was sunburned there for the 1st time in my life.

Oh, you want the history of the free kick from the fair catch, not my bald spot? Well, that's one of the earliest rules in football, extending back before there was American or Canadian football, and probably before rugby football was even known by that name. In various types of football in the British Isles, handling the ball was more or less prohibited, but an exception was for making or attempting to catch an opponent's (or sometimes a teammate's) kick that hadn't yet touched the ground (or in some cases had bounced no more than once). A successful catch resulted in play's being stopped pending the ball's being put back into play by a kick from the mark of the catch.

The various forms of football derived from these games took various paths with the fair catch. Most de-emphasized it. Australian Rules exalted it, to where it's not only the most generous in the conditions under which it's awarded (I'm using the word "awarded" here to indicate any right by consequence of rules, not just via penalties) but also having the most important cx to scoring. Soccer abolished the fair catch, leaving it with the greatest restrictions on handling of all major forms of football.

Canadian football abolished the fair catch in the 1940s IIRC, Rugby League in the late 1960s. Rugby Union took the free kick from a fair catch out of the possibility of scoring directly in 1975.

NCAA in 1950 -- in one of the few cases a Canadian football development may have influenced USAn football (I don't know if it actually did) -- abolished the fair catch. In 1951, NCAA restored the fair catch, but without the free kick option, leaving it the odd one in this regard in the major American codes, so that may be the bit of history you were looking for. The option to scrimmage instead of taking the free kick existed at least as far back as the 1860s in rugby football and in all games derived from it.

There's one game I know of (two if you count its own derivative, speed-a-way) that seems to have at least semi-independently reinvented a form of the old rules by which handling the ball directly off the ground was forbidden, but allowed from an aerial ball, which could be produced by an opponent's or teammate's kick: speedball. But you don't get anything much resembling a free kick for your trouble, just the right to handle the ball as it remains in play.

In games that extend a period of play for a free kick from a fair catch, there's one fairly simple way to deny it to the opponents: kick the ball out of bounds. To my knowledge, no such game has ever had a rule awarding a fair catch in such a circumstance, although it might seem they should. IIRC in NFL rules the ball's not even dead on crossing the sideline in the air even when it's obvious it'll come down out of bounds, so those extra seconds needed for it to hit the ground out of bounds can be useful in running out the clock while denying a period-extending free kick. And if even such a kick would be too risky, there's always a long high throw out of bounds, which, not being for the purpose of either avoiding loss of yardage or conserving time, is legal.

So, AFAICT, when a half or game is extended for a free kick from a fair catch, it means their opponents goofed. An exception would be a penalty-awarded fair catch where KCI is followed by enough of a live ball interval to run out the clock that otherwise would've had time. The period would've been extended anyway, but the free kick might be a good choice, yet the foul may not have been a stupid one but just a misjudgement by a player trying to prevent a runback.

Robert in the Bronx