Legal?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

Because if the snapper's feet are on the ground, he is not lying on the ground or in the air; therefore, the player is hurdling.

You cannot be on the ground or in the air if your feet are on the ground

You must be kidding. Unless you're doing a handstand or on your back with your feet in the air or something else "pathologic", you're guaranteed to have a foot on the ground if "you" are "on the ground". Hence the criterion in the definition that the feet be the only body parts on the ground.

Robert

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

You must be kidding. Unless you're doing a handstand or on your back with your feet in the air or something else "pathologic", you're guaranteed to have a foot on the ground if "you" are "on the ground". Hence the criterion in the definition that the feet be the only body parts on the ground.

Robert

Robert, I find it incomprehensible a man of your intelligence cannot comprehend such a simple statement.

A foot on the ground means standing upright on the ground. I did not mean a foot on the ground would be such that the heel is touching the ground or you are lying on your side such that a foot or both feet touch the ground on their sides. I truly meant standing upright with the entire sole of the shoe touching the ground.

If you still have a problem I will be happy to post a picture of "feet on the ground."

[Mike L]

I hate to say it, but I think I got nothing.
It appears the snapper has either one or both hands on the ground. That means he can be hurdled. It also appears the defender jumped over the gap between the snapper and the guard. Even if there was slight contact with the snapper, I can't see how you can call roughing as "a defender shall not charge directly into the snapper", which I don't see here at all. Also, it appears the defender may use a hand on his teammate's shoulder to help propel himself up and over. I think trying to use the "no player shall position himself on the shoulders or body of a teammate" rule is a stretch.
Bottom line for me, somebody should teach the snapper his job is not to duck so low out of the way after the snap that somebody could pull this off.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

Robert, I find it incomprehensible a man of your intelligence cannot comprehend such a simple statement.

A foot on the ground means standing upright on the ground. I did not mean a foot on the ground would be such that the heel is touching the ground or you are lying on your side such that a foot or both feet touch the ground on their sides. I truly meant standing upright with the entire sole of the shoe touching the ground.

If you still have a problem I will be happy to post a picture of "feet on the ground."

The important point is what meaning it has in the rules. I'm sure they mean it to have its literal meaning. If they wanted to say "upright" or "erect" -- as indeed the rules formerly did without clarif'n -- they wouldn't've clarified by adding the detail about no other part of the body touching the ground.

But in determining whether hurdling has occurred, as long as some other part of the surmounted player was touching the ground, it doesn't matter whether any part of either foot was also touching the ground.

Robert

[bigjohn]

I think he stepped on the snappers back.

9-4-3e

e. Position himself on the shoulders or body of a teammate or opponent to
gain an advantage.

[gtwbam]

BigJohn.
For what its worth, I believe your right on the money with this call.

[bigjohn]

2009 casebook

ADVANTAGE GAINED ILLEGALLY
9.4.3 SITUATION E: (a) End A1 goes 5 yards downfield and stops. Wide receiver
A2 jumps on his back and catches a pass; or (b) B1 steps on the back of snapper
A1 immediately after the snap as he propels himself into the air to block a
punt; or (c) B1 jumps on B2’s shoulders in an effort to block a field-goal attempt.
RULING: A personal foul in (a), (b) and (c). In all cases, an advantage has been
gained illegally.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

2009 casebook

ADVANTAGE GAINED ILLEGALLY
9.4.3 SITUATION E: (a) End A1 goes 5 yards downfield and stops. Wide receiver
A2 jumps on his back and catches a pass; or (b) B1 steps on the back of snapper
A1 immediately after the snap as he propels himself into the air to block a
punt; or (c) B1 jumps on B2’s shoulders in an effort to block a field-goal attempt.
RULING: A personal foul in (a), (b) and (c). In all cases, an advantage has been
gained illegally.

Since I can't see the video, I have to ask whether the player who blocked the kick appeared to propel himself into the air off the snapper's back (using the contact to gain or maintain altitude), or stepped on his back in an effort to get past him. The first would fit case (b) above, but the second would not be any of those cases. In other words, was the snapper's presence an advantage to the defender, or would he have been just as well (or better) off to have been able to plant that foot on the ground?

Robert

[svm1010]

I'm with Big John too.