Fair Catch or not?

[MRH]

R1 is preparing to catch a scrimmage kick in flight by K. K1 begins his charge to contact R1. In the brief moment before the catch R1 signals for a fair catch, makes the catch and is then contacted by K1. Since the fair catch signal was given after K1 began his charge does a personal foul occur?

In other words, is there any such thing as a fair catch signal being given too late?

I'm not finding anything in the NFHS book to support NOT calling a foul.

Primarily looking for the NFHS ruling but would like to know NCAA as well.

[BktBallRef]

As long as he gives a legal signal before the catch, he can't be hit.

[mbyron]

Also, if K is so close that he hinders R's opportunity to catch the kick, you might have KCI, regardless of whether R signals for a fair catch.

The idea of K "beginning his charge" is not rule-book language. R is to have an unmolested opportunity to catch the kick, and -- as BBR already noted -- if he signals fair catch he is not to be hit.

By rule it is possible to signal too late, namely if the runner signals after the kick has been caught or recovered (illegal), or any R signals after the kick has been muffed or grounded (invalid). Otherwise the signal is valid.

[chymechowder]

I'm not advocating the lighting up of punt returners, but if the receiver gives a quickie, single wave a half a second before the ball gets there, and Team A contacts the receiver (non-flagrant) just after the ball gets there, then I don't see how the signaler can have post-touching protection.

"Begins his charge" isn't in the book. But I see the point. The signal needs to be given in time for Team A to see it and react in time.

[jemiller]

I think that either you have KCI or contacting R after a valid fair catch signal. One or the other if the timing was so close to the catch. JIM

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

I'm not advocating the lighting up of punt returners, but if the receiver gives a quickie, single wave a half a second before the ball gets there, and Team A contacts the receiver (non-flagrant) just after the ball gets there, then I don't see how the signaler can have post-touching protection.

"Begins his charge" isn't in the book. But I see the point. The signal needs to be given in time for Team A to see it and react in time.

There is no basis in the rules for this restriction on R's right to a fair catch.

[chymechowder]

Agreed. Invalid is only defined as a signal given after the catch or after the ball hits the ground.

When I said "The signal needs to be given," what I meant was that I think the signal should be given in time for Team A to recognize it and react accordingly.

If the receiver gives a late, ambiguous signal just before the catch--are you saying that you'd still flag Team A for contacting the receiver?

Again, I'm not talking about a hit that occurs a millisecond after the ball gets there. Those hits are, practically speaking, simultaneous, and should be fouls whether or not a signal is given.

But I'm talking about the plays where the receiver catches it (no signal given). A second later Team A hits him. Not a flagrant hit. Not close enough to the catch that there's KCI. A good clean "bang-pause-bang" play. Are you saying that in these cases if the receiver throws out a mini-wave as he's putting his hands up for the catch, you've got a flag for hitting a signaller?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

But I'm talking about the plays where the receiver catches it (no signal given). A second later Team A hits him. Not a flagrant hit. Not close enough to the catch that there's KCI. A good clean "bang-pause-bang" play. Are you saying that in these cases if the receiver throws out a mini-wave as he's putting his hands up for the catch, you've got a flag for hitting a signaller?

If it's a legal signal, yes, I have a flag. As mbyron said, there is no time frame given, therefore, you can't create one because you "think" there should be one.

[chymechowder]

Originally Posted by mbyron

There is no basis in the rules for this restriction on R's right to a fair catch.

Actually there is a basis for it--of sorts.

2-7-2: A valid signal is a signal given by a player of Team B who has obviously signaled his intention by extending one hand only clearly above his head and waving that hand from side to side of his body more than once

2-7-3: An invalid signal is any waving signal by a player of Team B that does not meet this requirement.

So the time frame is: however long it takes him to clearly wave one hand from side to side at least twice.

EDIT: In hindsight, I should have been more specific about my scenario involving an invalid signal.

My whole point was: if the signal is being given so late that the signaller doesn't have time to meet the requirements of 2-7-2, and instead he does a single, chin-high wave, then he isn't afforded the normal post-touching protection.

The quickie/single wave signal I was talking about is, by definition, invalid.

Yes, Team A could still commit a personal or flagrant foul. But if it's a "normal/clean" hit, then there shouldn't be a foul.

Rereading Rule 6 now I see the issue. It starts with:

No player of Team B shall make any invalid signal.

Next it says, Any signal is invalid after it's caught, touches ground, etc.

But these don't mean the same thing. You can have an invalid signal before the ball touches something.

The second point just means that once the ball touches the ground, the nice-high-double-cross-body wave (normally the shining symbol of validity), is just another crummy invalid signal.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

My whole point was: if the signal is being given so late that the signaller doesn't have time to meet the requirements of 2-7-2, and instead he does a single, chin-high wave, then he isn't afforded the normal post-touching protection.

The quickie/single wave signal I was talking about is, by definition, invalid.

Yes, Team A could still commit a personal or flagrant foul. But if it's a "normal/clean" hit, then there shouldn't be a foul.

So it doesn't matter when the vaild signal is given?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

So it doesn't matter when the valid signal is given?

Exactly. If R gives a valid signal and is then hit, that's a PF. If he gives an invalid signal (too low, not enough waves, etc. etc.), then it is not a fair catch, there's no flag for PF, and we probably have a flag for invalid signal.

But there's simply no place for chyme's idea of time limits on a valid signal.

[chymechowder]

If you look at my posts, you'll see that I was always describing an invalid signal (even though I didn't specify that).

"single wave"
"ambiguous signal"

I wasn't trying to say that there should be a time window for a VALID signal.

I should have been more clear on that and actually specified invalid signal. What threw me was that I thought you were saying that so long as he gives any signal before touching the ball, then he's protected.

Sorry for the confusion and debating something over which we don't disagree, haha.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

If you look at my posts, you'll see that I was always describing an invalid signal (even though I didn't specify that).

"single wave"
"ambiguous signal"

I wasn't trying to say that there should be a time window for a VALID signal.

I should have been more clear on that and actually specified invalid signal. What threw me was that I thought you were saying that so long as he gives any signal before touching the ball, then he's protected.

Sorry for the confusion and debating something over which we don't disagree, haha.

OK, I'll go along with that. Though in my first post in the thread I said "signals fair catch," which of course refers to a valid signal. Why would anyone think that an invalid signal conferred any protection on R?

[chymechowder]

Semantic disconnect on my end from the get-go.

"Signals fair catch": I didn't take that as necessarily being a valid signal. Just that the receiver was signalling.

"Otherwise the signal is valid": Took that as you saying the ONLY way a signal can be invalid is if it comes after catch/muff/ground touching.

Add both of those to the fact that initially I forgot to look up the definitions in Rule 2, haha.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

"Otherwise the signal is valid": Took that as you saying the ONLY way a signal can be invalid is if it comes after catch/muff/ground touching.

You're right: my statement was misleading. Of course there are other ways to make an invalid signal (two arms, not high enough, etc.). I apologize.