Dead Ball foul or Roughing or neither

[Robert Goodman]

Had to be there. Given the facts presented I'm leaning toward its being a nothing. The players on both teams are equally liable for delay of game if they knowingly played thru the whistle, but if it looks like they didn't know what was going on, it's a nothing. If the kicker's action looked half hearted while the opponent lustily plowed into him, personal foul. However, the fact that the kicker went so far as to get the kick off mitigates against that last interpret'n.

Could the play be dangerous? Sure, but so could a lot of things when they're not playing football, so that alone is not an excuse for flagging it.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Had to be there. Given the facts presented I'm leaning toward its being a nothing. The players on both teams are equally liable for delay of game if they knowingly played thru the whistle, but if it looks like they didn't know what was going on, it's a nothing. If the kicker's action looked half hearted while the opponent lustily plowed into him, personal foul. However, the fact that the kicker went so far as to get the kick off mitigates against that last interpret'n.

Could the play be dangerous? Sure, but so could a lot of things when they're not playing football, so that alone is not an excuse for flagging it.

This surprises me... think about it. The hit that the player made on the kicker would have been illegal if performed during a live ball. How could it possibly, then, not be illegal if performed during a dead ball? If the excuse given is that he didn't know it was a dead ball, it still doesn't excuse the fact that even if he was right it would have been illegal...

[JRutledge]

The slowness of the whistle really does not seem to make much difference to me. A whistle does not have to blow in order to kill a play and a player to realize something is wrong. Many plays end on my crew and no whistle is blown and somehow players stop. That is an excuse, so I have no problem penalizing a player that would have likely had to run 10 yards or more to get to the kicker in the first place.

Peace

[RadioBlue]

I agree w/ Rut. This is a flag. However, it cannot be a roughing penalty and cannot be an AFD.

[Lakesref]

Thanks for the help. I Kicked this one I think. We penalized the FS but let the roughing go under the assumption that there was no play. No play - no roughing.I didn't feel very confident in that though and told the coach I would research it and call him.I should have had a DB personal it appears. Weirdly, on the 4th down replay they roughed the punter again and K got their AFD.

[maven]

Originally Posted by Lakesref

Weirdly, on the 4th down replay they roughed the punter again and K got their AFD.

Well, you weren't paying attention on the first one, so they made sure to do it again so you could get it right!

[HLin NC]

I Kicked this one I think. We penalized the FS but let the roughing go under the assumption that there was no play. No play - no roughing.

The idea that you could have a dead ball personal foul in your play never got brought up? C'mon, this isn't just on you, this was a crew brain fart.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

This surprises me... think about it. The hit that the player made on the kicker would have been illegal if performed during a live ball.

Heck, it would've been illegal on the street outside a football game too, but what's that got to do with it? Roughing the kicker is a live ball foul; no live ball, no live ball fouls.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Heck, it would've been illegal on the street outside a football game too, but what's that got to do with it? Roughing the kicker is a live ball foul; no live ball, no live ball fouls.

LOTS of things are illegal on the street, but ok inside a game.

I don't believe I was saying this was a live ball foul.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

LOTS of things are illegal on the street, but ok inside a game.

Well, duh! And lots of things are illegal during one interval of a game, and illegal during another interval.

I don't believe I was saying this was a live ball foul.

But you were implying it should be a foul during a dead ball interval because it would've been one during a live ball interval.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Well, duh! And lots of things are illegal during one interval of a game, and illegal during another interval.

But you were implying it should be a foul during a dead ball interval because it would've been one during a live ball interval.

Here's what I'm saying in a nutshell.

The contact was obviously WAY after the whistle - and should be a dead ball foul.

There are times, when (for whatever reason) it is not clear to the player that the play is dead (like in this case, the whistle was late or weak), the excuse is made that a foul shouldn't be one because he didn't know the play was dead and whatever he did would have been okay if the play was not dead.

In this case, even THAT argument can not be made, because what he did would have been a foul even if the ball had been live.

[Adam]

It seems to me the confusion lies with where to draw the line on ignoring dead ball contact.

Examples (for my own clarification as a rookie FB official):
1. The ball is snapped, but the HL has an encroachment foul on the defense. The whistle is late, and immediately after the whistle, A67 holds B99. Ignore the DB contact?

I think so.

2. The ball is snapped, but the U has a snap infraction. Immediately after the whistle, B97 grabs the facemask of an offensive lineman. Ignore the DB contact?

I doubt it.

3. The ball is snapped in a punt formation, but the LJ has a false start on the wing. Immediately after the snap and before the whistle, the B99 roughs the snapper. Ignore the DB contact?

I don't know.

In basketball, DB contact is ignored if it's not intentional or flagrant, and I think I'm trying in vain to apply that standard to football.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Here's what I'm saying in a nutshell.

The contact was obviously WAY after the whistle

How do you figure that from what's been written here?

If it was obviously way after the whistle, then it makes no difference what kind of play it might've been had the ball been live; it's a personal foul, UR, possibly disqualifying. You might have 2 dead ball fouls penalized in order: delay of game on the kicker, then the personal foul.

There are times, when (for whatever reason) it is not clear to the player that the play is dead (like in this case, the whistle was late or weak), the excuse is made that a foul shouldn't be one because he didn't know the play was dead and whatever he did would have been okay if the play was not dead.

In this case, even THAT argument can not be made, because what he did would have been a foul even if the ball had been live.

But sports officiating doesn't work like law court, with choice of defenses. You're not allowed to stipulate stuff, handle legs of contingency separately.