The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 11, 2011, 01:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 89
Thumbs up Roughing the kicker....

I was actually doing radio and had never seen this play before. I asked another official later in the week and he said the guys in stripes got it right. The opposing coach wasn't happy.

High School
Point after attempt:

Team A is kicking.
Ball is snapped.... it's high but the holder rises up and corrals it and sets it down. Team B player who is rushing from the edge comes and and tackles the kicker before the ball is kicked. Team B 2/3/4 tackles the holder once the kicker gets whacked.

Result... Personal Foul roughing the kicker and the get to kick again.

Why Team B went straight after the kicker instead of the ball i have no idea.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 11, 2011, 01:16pm
Archaic Power Monger
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,983
A kicker is not a kicker by definition until he kicks the ball so you can't have roughing in this situation. That said, if he doesn't possess the ball, there could be a personal foul for unecessary roughness but I would want to see the play to say whether or not that was the case.
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 11, 2011, 01:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 89
Should have added i do believe the kicker took at least one step towards the ball intending to kick it but never reached the ball before being whacked. I don't know if that makes a difference.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 11, 2011, 01:28pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMUplayer View Post
Should have added i do believe the kicker took at least one step towards the ball intending to kick it but never reached the ball before being whacked. I don't know if that makes a difference.
It makes a huge difference. You have to touch the ball with your leg or lower leg to be considered a kicker. Then again that was stated previously so that is why roughing the kicker would not be appropriate based on your description. It matters because if you call a RTK or a personal foul you have a difference between an automatic first down and 15 yards and depending on the down and distance the replaying the same down.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 11, 2011, 01:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMUplayer View Post
Should have added i do believe the kicker took at least one step towards the ball intending to kick it but never reached the ball before being whacked. I don't know if that makes a difference.
It does not. If he was tackled before kicking, it cannot by rule be roughing the kicker. Could be a PF, or holding, but not roughing.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 11, 2011, 01:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMUplayer View Post
Should have added i do believe the kicker took at least one step towards the ball intending to kick it but never reached the ball before being whacked. I don't know if that makes a difference.
It doesn't. I guess the question is... was the contact on the kicker such that one would call it USC had the contact been on, say, a WR or OL.

If no, then no - K is just a random player until he actually makes contact between ball and foot, and gets no special protection.

To add, though ... this must have been the slowest PAT attempt ever.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 11, 2011, 01:49pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
It doesn't. I guess the question is... was the contact on the kicker such that one would call it USC had the contact been on, say, a WR or OL.

If no, then no - K is just a random player until he actually makes contact between ball and foot, and gets no special protection.

To add, though ... this must have been the slowest PAT attempt ever.
Well, it's not a USC since it's contact related.

But if K was tackled, it's probably holding.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 11, 2011, 05:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Jerry City, Ohio
Posts: 394
Holding is the right call: NF Rule 9-2-3c. (Assmes contact not excessive or flagrant to warrant Personal Foul)

I would consider this a running play so enforcement would be from the end of the run (basic spot), penalize 1/2 distance and replay the Try.

I negate loose ball play because no loose ball ever was attempted. I interpret NF 10-3-1 Note to mean that the run (by holder in this play) MUST be followed by legal or illegal kick, legal forward pass, backward pass, or fumble for the run to be classified as part of the running play. This play did not have that therefore a running play.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 11, 2011, 07:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,614
Unless a player is a runner or pretending to be a runner, the defense can't just tackle him. Whether he's about to catch a screen pass or kick a PAT, it's illegal and it's holding.
__________________
"...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
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 11, 2011, 08:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kirkland, Washington
Posts: 422
Send a message via ICQ to Jim S Send a message via AIM to Jim S
Agree thatthe correct call here is holding. If this occured on a field goal instead of a try it would NOT result in a new series unless the ball was moved beyond the line to gain.
__________________
Jim Schroeder

Read Rule 2, Read Rule 2, Read Rule 2!
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2011, 10:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 622
From the description you might have had two fouls: holding for tackling the would be kicker and PF for tackling the holder since he may have been defenseless.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2011, 11:13am
TODO: creative title here
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,250
Agreed that there can't be roughing the kicker, because he was never a kicker.

My guess is that they called roughing the holder.

I know we don't have a kicker until the ball is kicked, but we do have a holder at the snap... If he's not a holder, the ball would be dead as soon as his knee touched the ground while he was in possession.

Rule 2-32-7 defines the holder.
Rule 4-2-2-2 defines what the holder can do (rise and catch/recover an errant snap, then put a knee back on the ground).
Rule 9-4-5 defines roughing the kicker/holder.

The signal for Roughing the Holder is the same as the signal for Roughing the Kicker, so I can see how the OP would've been confused, especially if there's no microphone on the Referee.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2011, 11:44am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,833
I agree with all the details that've been posted, but fortunately in the instant case it didn't matter, it would still have been half the distance & repeat the try.

In the more general case, I think once you take down the intended kicker, if the holder still has a knee on the ground, the ball's dead and no roughing-the-holder is possible.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2011, 11:52am
CT1 CT1 is offline
Official & ***** Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,049
I don't believe you could have roughing the holder on the OP's play. The holder has possession of the ball, and could easily (and legally) rise to run or pass.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2011, 12:01pm
TODO: creative title here
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
In the more general case, I think once you take down the intended kicker, if the holder still has a knee on the ground, the ball's dead and no roughing-the-holder is possible.
You won't find any rulebook basis to support this assertion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CT1
I don't believe you could have roughing the holder on the OP's play. The holder has possession of the ball, and could easily (and legally) rise to run or pass.
Just because the holder can rise to run/pass does not mean that the holder is required to do so. As long as he's still controlling the ball on the kicking tee, he's still a holder, and thus, can potentially be roughed.
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
roughing the kicker golfdesigner Football 5 Mon Aug 07, 2006 02:08am
Roughing the Kicker jlawyer55 Football 5 Sun Oct 23, 2005 05:54pm
Roughing the Kicker New AZ Ref Football 5 Fri Oct 07, 2005 02:19pm
Roughing the kicker Texoma_LJ Football 5 Wed Oct 06, 2004 08:29am
Roughing the kicker DeltaRef Football 5 Tue Dec 16, 2003 09:20pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:07am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1