The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 17, 2010, 06:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 59
Muffed punt and second kick

Thought I had seen this posted on a message board, but cannot find it. What would you have here? I think it is R's ball where K falls on the second punt. Also, please list a rule reference, as that is what I am unable to find to support my answer.

Play: 4th and 10 from the K20 yard line. K's scrimmage
kick is short and is muffed in flight by R at the K30
yard line and bounces back to the K15 yard line where
the punter picks up the ball again and kicks a second
scrimmage kick from behind the neutral zone. The second
kick goes about 35 yards where there is no longer an R
player to receive a kick. The ball is recovered by K at
midfield.

Ruling?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 17, 2010, 07:42pm
Chain of Fools
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,648
If we're talking Fed go to Rule 6-2.
There is no specific rule coverage regarding a second kick, either in favor or against. That which is not prohibited is allowed.

There was a lively discussion about this scenario on one of the boards not to long ago. Try using the "search" function on them and you might find it.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 17, 2010, 07:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by HLin NC View Post
If we're talking Fed go to Rule 6-2.
There is no specific rule coverage regarding a second kick, either in favor or against. That which is not prohibited is allowed.

There was a lively discussion about this scenario on one of the boards not to long ago. Try using the "search" function on them and you might find it.
Yeah, I know I read it somewhere...just not sure where. The second kick is not what I am asking about. I am wanting to know who gets the ball after the second kick since it was muffed previously and the re-kicked.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 17, 2010, 08:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 622
There have been some discussions on other boards about this play and I think most people are in consensus that the second kick wipes out the first one so that R's touch of the first kick is no longer a factor and the ball will belong to R when the second kick becomes dead.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 17, 2010, 08:08pm
Chain of Fools
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,648
That is why I pointed you to rule 6-2. The second kick doesn't change anything. It will remain R's ball.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 17, 2010, 08:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by HLin NC View Post
That is why I pointed you to rule 6-2. The second kick doesn't change anything. It will remain R's ball.
Thanks. I didn't see that...I am an umpire
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 17, 2010, 09:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 178
In NCAA the ball would become dead when recovered by the punter. It would be K's ball (Team A), 1st/10 at their 15.

So you're saying in Fed, that if the return team muffs a punt, the kick team can pick it up and advance it?? Or can they only do something with it (in this case, kick it again) if the recovery is behind the neutral zone?
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 17, 2010, 09:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by chymechowder View Post
So you're saying in Fed, that if the return team muffs a punt, the kick team can pick it up and advance it?? Or can they only do something with it (in this case, kick it again) if the recovery is behind the neutral zone?
Either team can advance a kick recovered in K's backfield, whether it's been muffed or not.

K can also pass or kick the ball again.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 18, 2010, 06:22am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 102
This play was discussed at NFHS Forum at the following link:

NFHS Forum: Two Scrimmage Kicks

After much debate, the following reply was posted:

OFFICIAL NFHS RULING: Called on this and their ruling is that K, by kicking again, had given up possession and with it the right to a new series. K downing the kick becomes first touching under 5-1-3g.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 18, 2010, 06:57am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by ump33 View Post
This play was discussed at NFHS Forum at the following link:

NFHS Forum: Two Scrimmage Kicks

After much debate, the following reply was posted:

OFFICIAL NFHS RULING: Called on this and their ruling is that K, by kicking again, had given up possession and with it the right to a new series. K downing the kick becomes first touching under 5-1-3g.
Right, and I wouldn't be surprised to see this show up in the case book.

When R muffs a scrimmage kick beyond the LOS, the team in possession at the end of the down will get a new series (5-1-3f). This is the provision that leads some to think that K should get the ball after the second kick.

However, the purpose of this kind of scrimmage kick is to initiate a change of possession. That's still true for the second kick. And the second kick is legal: no rule prohibits a second kick (compare the forward pass rule), the ball is not dead when K recovers a kick behind the NZ (6-2-3), and during any down a team may legally perform a scrimmage kick before team possession has changed (6-2-1).

A second legal kick need not betray an ignorance of the rules: if R blocks the kick and never touches it beyond the NZ, a second kick is not a bad idea.

But on this play K would have had a new series after recovering a kick that R muffed beyond the NZ, and in most cases they should just keep the ball. If NFHS had given K the ball in this play, that ruling would reward ignorance. I think that the reported ruling is right on the money.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
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
Muffed Punt - TD? bossman72 Football 7 Thu Oct 23, 2008 07:27am
Muffed Punt on 3rd down gtwbam Football 3 Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:17am
MNF: Muffed punt tpaul Football 4 Tue Oct 11, 2005 07:15am
Punt muffed in own end zone (NFL) coogrfan Football 9 Fri Aug 12, 2005 03:06am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:22am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1