NFL rules questions
 

If, on a field goal/extra point, while the holder is holding the tip of the ball (waiting for the place kicker to kick it), if he is touched by a defender, is the holder down by contact?

When a running back runs into the line of scrimmage near the hash marks, the umpire will not take that ball out of play, however, if the running back is taken down near the out of bounds line, the umpire will ask for a new ball for the next down. What is the criteria in terms of when the umpire should take the ball out of play on a running play?

To your first question, I would say no. Pinning the ball against the ground wouldn't constitute possession of the ball.

When working 6 or 7-man mechanics, a new ball is usually rotated in when the down ends outside the top of the numbers or there is an incomplete pass not quickly retrieved. This relies on good ball boys and good ball mechanics by the sideline officials.

With 5-man mechanics the same ball is usually used during an entire drive unless there is a long incomplete pass.

"An official shall declare dead ball and the down ended...[w]hen a runner is contacted by a defensive player and he touches the ground with any part of his body except his hands or feet...."

"A player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball inbounds."

"The runner is an offensive player who is in possession of a live ball."

So the only issue is whether the player holding the ball for a place kick is in firm grip and control of the ball, or whether the ball is considered loose at the time. I think it's in player possession and therefore would be dead under the conditions described.
When the umpire thinks it's scuffed enough to give the pitcher an unwarranted advantage.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I don't know how a player pinning the ball, with one finger, to the ground, equals a player having a firm grip of the ball.

FWIW, in NCAA and Fed this would be considered possession as there are explicit exceptions allowing the holder to have his knee on the ground and not be down.

Well that's definitive enough for me. Ruling: No, he is not down.

Probably I should've quoted a little more of this one:

"The runner is an offensive player who is in possession of a live ball [cross-ref. omitted], i.e. holding the ball or carrying it in any direction."

Since NFL's definition of "placekick" ends, "The ball may be held in position by a teammate.", I conclude that the type of "hold" on the ball referred to in the first one includes that in the other.

I'm omitting place references, because it's likely some of them have been renumbered since the edition I have, but unlikely that their wording has changed.

These are pretty old rules, at least some of the language probably dating to a time they shared NCAA's, and it appears they muddied the water by that "i.e." phrase, which has the potential of providing conflicting definitions of player possession in the case of a live ball. I think they should be read in such a way as to make them conform to each other, so that holding the ball be considered sufficient to have possession, and since the placekick definition uses the word "held", no judgement is needed -- that they're saying by definition that the ball being placed is in possession of the placer.

The alternative would be to consider the placement of the ball on the ground with the hand still on it to be a fumble, "any act, other than a pass or legal kick, which results in loss of player possession." That would make a live-ball placekick an act of kicking a live loose ball. Unfortunately the same rule book says, "No player may deliberately kick any loose ball or ball in player's possession.", which apparently makes a live ball place kick illegal whether the ball is deemed loose or in the holder's possession! Probably an editorial error omitting the word "opposing" before "player's", huh? If we make that mental correction, then it would seem the ball being placed for the kick would have to remain in the placer's possession, else making the kicking of the ball illegal.

I think you're reading way too much into the wording here.

It seems clear to me that the exception allowing the holder to have his knee on the ground in all other codes would apply to a holder who gets touched by a defender in the NFL. The fact that it isn't worded accordingly is a result of the fact that it's obvious, and anyone actually working an NFL game would know this.

No, I don't think it works that way because of the history of this rule difference. It was NCAA that introduced the rule providing that a runner was down on touching the ground other than with hands or feet, and so it was only NCAA and Fed that required that exception. Therefore the combination of touching an opponent and (other than with hands or feet) the ground was needed only in NFL rules. It would be strange to apply a provision from codes where the exception was necessary to one where it is not necessary.