An interesting thing happened in my Friday H.S. Varstiy game. During a try, the K team placed the kicking tee on the 8 yard line instead of the 10. It made for some interseting discussion. Is Roughing the snapper off? Can they score the 1 point try from the tee?
Here are some of the rules references.


2003 NFHS Rule 9-4-5 page 57
"Roughing the snapper. A defensive player shall not charge directly into the snapper when the offensive team is in a scrimmage-kick formation."

hmmm.. what is the defination of a scrimmage-kick formation??

2003 NFHS Rule 2-14-2 page 21
"A scrimmage-kick formation is a formation with at least one player 7 yards or more behind the netural zone and in posistion to receive the long snap. No player may be in posistion to receive a hand-to-hand snap from between the snapper's legs."


I beleive that the "snapper protection" would therefore be off. How about the score? I can't find anything to say that a field-goal/try must be from a scrimmage-kick formation.

Also, how would you call this? Safety would say call the roughing anyway, but the rules wouldn't support it.

Any thoughts??

You've answered your own question. It's not roughing.

Also, there is no restriction with regards to using the kickoff type tee. Most teams don't because the ball can't be teed as quickly.

Any kick made from in or behind the NZ and made from a controlled hold can score 1 point during a try. As long as it is the first kick and the ball wasn't downed by the holder if he placed his knee on the ground in a way that isn't allowed for a scrimmage kick.

As for roughing the snapper, that requires 7 yards and proper positioning of players to allow that protection.

I have always wondered why 7 yards was chosen. Could it have been because most snaps for field goals and extra point trys were already 7 yards?

Quote:

As for roughing the snapper, that requires 7 yards and proper positioning of players to allow that protection.

Does that mean if the kicker is 6 yards and 2 feet the snapper is "free meat?"

I would err on the side of safety and say close enough because the intent of the rule is to protect the long snapper who is in a terribly bad position after he snaps the ball. Long snapping is a highly skilled position not for those who cannot stand punishment. As Coach Madden says, if you can long snap it, you got a job.

But 5 yards as in this example is stretching the point.

What was the consensus of the meeting? Roughing or not?

It is roughing... it is an obvious scrimmage kick formation and I do not know how many officials really measure or look to see if they are 6, 7 or 8 yards behind the snapper. So the spirt of the rules is to protect a snapper, holder, and kicker who are not in a position to protect themselves..

My call is roughing every time! [anyway, no coach is going to know the rule about 7 yards anyway...hehehe]

I have to agree with both sides which makes it tough. They should be protected even though the rule says no as safety would (should) prevail. But if we bend this rule then we open ourselves up for a coach to expect us to bend another, and then another, etc...

Bending is precisly what the coaches work to do. The original rule stated that if you had a player 7 or more yards off of the LOS that was a scrimmage kick formation and thus the snapper could not be contacted directly. Some coach read that and put a flanker off of the line by 7 yards with the quarterback under center. This formation met the definition of a scrimmage kick formation. This was obviously not the intent of the new rule but was a result of how it was written. Since then we have more requirements like no one in position to take a direct snap and the player 7 yards off to be in a position to take it.

So the intent of the rule for roughing the snapper is to protect the snapper while in a vulnerable position. If they are lining up in a field goal formation but aren't quite as deep as is required by rule we can still tell the defense to stay off of the snapper just like we normally do on any normal punt, try, or field goal. The coaches may know that the protection requires 7 yards but the players probably don't. All they know is that you told them to stay off of the snapper.

guys if we go with the thought that he gets protection, then what is to say he shouldn't be protected in the shotgun formation.....ie we should go with what is written, he must be 7 yards to be afforded the protection. If we do otherwise a coach is going to want the protection for the shotgun....I know safety is a concern but really has there been a lot of seriously injured centers from being hit after a long snap??? BTW ramaris, where in wyoming are you...you are the only wyomingite I have seen in here...glad to not be alone anymore LOL :)

Apparently or we wouldn't have this rule.

The safety concern is that the snapper has his head between his knees on a long snap because he would normally use both hands for a long snap and is looking back to see where to snap it to. In a shotgun formation the center will normally snap the ball with one hand and is looking forward to see the defender who he is going to block. Driving a guy's chin into his chest and rolling him up into a ball is very dangerous. It is much easier to break your neck if you bend your head forward than if you bend it back.

Why would it not be enforced for a "shotgun" formation? What is the difference between "shotgun" and "scrimmage-kick" formation? As long as there is one player 7+yds behind the neutral zone and in position to receive the long snap. Being in "scrimmage-kick" formation does not assure that A will kick.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RedCashions

Quote:

Originally posted by cmathews ... Why would it not be enforced for a "shotgun" formation? What is the difference between "shotgun" and "scrimmage-kick" formation? As long as there is one player 7+yds behind the neutral zone and in position to receive the long snap. Being in "scrimmage-kick" formation does not assure that A will kick.

Under NF rules, there is no difference, the snapper is supposed to be protected.

Not so under NCAA, but lets stay with NF as that's where there seems to be some disagreement. This is not new stuff, it's been around for at least 3 maybe 4 years.

Scrimmage kick formation is equal to shotdun formation if the yardage part is meet. Blame this on the NF, they can fix this with an editiorial change to that definition.

Yes I was referring NF as those are the rules I operate by every Friday night.

I disagree with you, David.
 

What other rules do yoiu not enforce or make up because the coach doesn't know the rule? I'm not trying to be facetious but that's exactly what you're saying.

If the rule says 7 yards and the holder is only 5 yards away, what right do we have to change the rule?

I agree that we can't change the rule but we can do a little preventative officiating and when the snapper puts both hands on the ball then U can remind defensive line to not hit him with his head down. Safety first.

Warrenkicker, if A is not in a scrimmage kick formation, you can't very well do that. I had a coach talk to me this weekend, he thought that crack back blocks, even legal ones should not be allowed. His reasoning was that they got a couple players hurt last year on legal crack backs, so thus a safety concern. You can't very well tell the wide out not to crack back on the defense, because it is legal, just as it is legal to hit the center if A is not in a scrimmage kick formation.

But if a guy is intent on drive another guy's head between his knees then we should be a little worried about what is happening. If the defender was trying to get past the snapper then maybe he should be going around instead of through a guy who isn't even trying to block someone.

I'm just saying that U can remind the defense to be careful of the snapper with his head down. I'm not avocating calling it as a foul but just to try to keep that situation from causing an injury and then having one coach down your neck for not flagging it.

has anyone ever seen a snapper injured this way?? I have never seen or heard of it, I know I am in Wyoming where there are only a few people let alone football teams, but I have never seen or heard of it? I couldn't believe when they instituted the rule. The first time I saw it called it amazed me. I would venture to guess that more players are injured annually by blocks below the waist (legal blocks) than all of the centers ever injured before the rule was instituted. I don't have any figures to back this up, just a guess I have. Does anyone have any statistics??

It always amazes me how often I read of or hear of an experienced official advocating making up our own rules. If a rule needs to be changed for safety purposes, we have avenues to propose such changes. We are the enforcers of the rules, not the writers of the rules.

What happens when you tell one team not to hit the center in such a situation, and a player informs his coach that you did so... then he lines up in similar formation and the other team hits your center - when you don't flag it (as you shouldn't), coach goes ballistic and has every right to. (Granted - this gives coaches more credit than they deserve, but I've met one or two that actually read the rulebook on occasion).

Can you say, "Derock"?

cc: JN (lol)

Re: I disagree with you, David.
 

Don't you do it every game? You let a holding call go because it did not have an effect on the play. You should call those.. it is in the rules!...

You as an officials have every right to use common sense in enforcing the rules. If a player gains an advantage by breaking them, throw the flag. If a player has no advantage gained during a penalty, let it go. If the safety of the player is at stake, you better do what you can do to make sure the player is not hurt. 7 or 5 yards, my thought is with the player and doing what I think it right. I would rather be critized for what I think is a safety issue, then have a kid being carried off the field.

So, what I am saying that in an obvious kick formation/situation (as described), protect the players and you and the players will be better off.

The rule does say that no one can be in posistion to receive a 'hand-to-hand' snap from center so this is ruled out anyway

I am currently living in Cheyenne, however I white hat a crew out of Casper.

Great, this has invoked some really great discussion, which is what I was hoping for.

Our crew never really did come up with a final verdict.
Just lots of discussion, which is always good anyway.

Honestly, I still don't know how I would have handled it had roughing occured. I guess I still have until Friday to figure it all out.

Incidently, I beleive that I am going to discuss this "discrepancy" with our comissioner who is on the rules comittee. Clarifaction would not be to difficult.

Mike,
Now I remember you :)...hey when you talk to Ron ask him about the double foul/PSK thing and what he wants to see in Wyoming...

Hey all...not coaching this year...going back to law school...time to make some money i guess....

anyway, here is a coach's thought on the matter.

1. Most good coaches definitely know about the seven yards rule....so that is just a foolish assumption.

2. Shotguns in my league were sometimes seven yards on purpose and discussed in pregame as def being the same so the snapper would get protection even if one hand and head up...seven yards is seven yards...

3. The rule clearly says, must have at least one player in a position to catch the snap....the rule does not say that the player in position must be the one who catches it....so in a fg formation a coach could most definitely argue that the standing kicker is in a position to catch the snap farther than seven yards deep, therefore granting protection to the snapper...interesting point I guess...especially if he were a straight on kicker there would be absolutely no counter argument in this case...a soccer style kicker that is offset a ton may not get leeway here but a normal soccer style kicker can definitely catch a snap that sails high...seen it done tons of times...

4. here is a thought...how about a shotgun snap with the intended quarterback at five yards over the gaurd and the runningback straight behind center at eight yards...the quarterback intercepts the snap...I say, clearly by rule, the snapper would get protection...just like he gets protection on a fake punt when the snap goes to the up back...no difference here....

As far as roughing the snapper goes I would def say that the kicker is in good position beyond seven yards everytime...no matter where the holder is ....

Re: Re: I disagree with you, David.
 

No rule has been broken.

Quote:

So, what I am saying that in an obvious kick formation/situation (as described), protect the players and you and the players will be better off.

So, where does it stop? 4 yards? 3 yards? 2 yards?

BTW, wheher you throw the flag or not has absolutely no bearing on whether the kid gets hurt or not.

Making up your own rules will keep you in the soup. Keep the flag in your pocket.