There was no kick, so you can't have roughing the kicker.

And how can you have roughing the holder? There was no kick - so they essentially tackled the ball carrier.

Would have to see it, of course, but it appears that this was a legal play. The only call you make is to another crew to say "You should have seen our play tonight!" :)

Impossible if there's nobody in position to kick. The intended kicker has been pulled down. There is no longer an exception in effect to the rule that makes the ball dead if the player in possession of it is kneeling.

The exception applies if "at the snap, a place-kick holder with his knee(s) on the ground and with a teammate in kicking position catches or recovers 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 teammate was in kicking position at the snap so the exception is in force and, since it doesn't say while a teammate is in kicking position, there's no reason why the exception would end just because the teammate is no longer in kicking position for any reason.

Sigh... read the rule please. Specifically look for the exception and when it is determined whether that exception is in play.

But once the kicker is gone, the holder ceases to place the ball for a kick. If your interpret'n were correct, that placing the ball for a kick were simply an act that is completed once the ball is teed up, then while in that position the holder who momentarily teed up the ball could then do anything with the ball and it would remain alive. Yet we know that's not the case, because there's a separate exception to allow him to rise, and it's well established that he can't pass the ball from the kneeling position in Fed rules. Therefore placing the ball for a kick must be a continuing action that ends only when the ball is kicked or the holder rises; it is not completed once the ball is teed up, it is ongoing while the ball is held in that position for an ostensible place kick. If there is no kicker in position, then the exception no longer applies.

Your saying that "places a ball for a kick" implicitly includes a teammate in a kicking position, placing a ball for a kick is an ongoing action, and the exception terminates if the ongoing action ceases without the holder rising appropriately. Let's look at them in that order.

If "places a ball for a kick" implicitly includes having a teammate in a kicking position, why would the rule specifically require a teammate in a kicking position and placing the ball for a kick? That would be redundant. I submit placing a ball for a kick is merely putting the ball on the ground so that it can be placed kicked since that action has no other football purpose.

I'll go along with it being an ongoing action but I don't believe it has much relevance as the exception will continue as long as he holds the ball to the ground.

The third point is basically moot as we'd all agree the play is dead if the holder did something other than holding the ball to the ground or rising.

That's a good point, as it wasn't always part of the rules provision, and did use to be implicit. All I know is, if Fed thought they'd clarified this with their current wording, they're wrong. But I had missed that apparently there's now no exception for a ball received from other than either a snap or muffed ball from a snap, which would preclude the scenario brought up here from the video a while ago, i.e. the possibility of a 2nd place kick from a blocked kick -- unless the placer squats instead of kneeling.

I can think of one play situation where the 2 interpret'ns would make a practical difference. What happens when a fake place kick play involves the kicker's closely missing the ball and faking a follow-thru, and then after a delay during which the placer has gotten his body position around to better conceal the ball (and the defense is all looking downfield to try to find it), he arises to continue play? One interpret'n would allow play to continue, the other not.

Also, assuming play is allowed to continue, would the placer be allowed to draw the ball closer to his body to conceal it while he's still on the ground? How about drumming on the ball to simulate the sound of the kicker's foot hitting it?

If it's not kickable from that position, I think he'd be down as it's no longer placed for kicking. I don't see a problem with drumming the ball as far as the exception goes.

Would it make a difference if the kicker was just shoved "down" on his way to but prior to kicking the ball.

Right footed kicker..... end rusher came from the right defensive end

Well, that's what I thought, but others are saying the condition of placing the ball for a kick needs to be satisfied only for a moment, and then he's not down later even if one or more of those conditions no longer apply.

But your conditioning what he is doing based on the continued presence of a potential kicker, who is only required to be there at the snap, whereas, I'm conditioning it only on him ceasing to hold the ball for a kick without rising.

With the rule written as it is, I don't see any reason to read either one as a continuing condition and not the other.

I must respectfully disagree.

Have video of the play
 

I can't pull the exact time because youtube blocked here at work but it's roughly 1/2 way to 2/3rd into it.

Riverheads vs Page County Football Highlights - YouTube

That's just good defense (and a poor snap) - I got nothing.

I also got a no call on the block in the back along the sideline a few plays earlier.