scuba chuck Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Can anyone explain the ruling here? This is so baffling to me, and if I were a KC fan, I'd be irate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorstCoachingEver Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I'd be irrate if I had LJ. KC would have had the ball inside the RZ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 The explanation was that it passed the line of scrimage and was touched by a KC player then recovered by a SD player costing me a prime LJ scoring opportunity and making me want to go on a killing spree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jake_the_builder Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Crosses line of scrimmage, considered a muffed catch by KC when touched then it was recovered by SD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuba chuck Posted December 18, 2006 Author Share Posted December 18, 2006 Crosses line of scrimmage, considered a muffed catch by KC when touched then it was recovered by SD. Where is the logic in that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egret Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 It's treated just like a muffed catch on a punt once it crosses the line of scrimmage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorstCoachingEver Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Well, I guess that's the rule then. I seriously think it needs to be rewritten. The ball should be considered "live" after a block and thus SD would have turned the ball over on downs b/c they didn't recover the ball past the first down line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I understand the rule but I don't like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuba chuck Posted December 18, 2006 Author Share Posted December 18, 2006 It's treated just like a muffed catch on a punt once it crosses the line of scrimmage. That would make more sense if the ball passed the line of scrimmage in the air. The ball bounced before the line of scrimmage first. I agree that it should be considered live, not a muffed punt recovery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Our season in a nutshell. Enjoy and embrace the misery everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9ersdude Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 at the very least it seems like it would have been a turnover on downs. very strange . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 That has to be the dumbest rule I have ever heard of. You penalize a team for making a great play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorstCoachingEver Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 That would make more sense if the ball passed the line of scrimmage in the air. The ball bounced before the line of scrimmage first. I agree that it should be considered live, not a muffed punt recovery. I completely agree. I understand why the rule is as it is b/c punts can be partially blocked and still travel 40 yards downfield. BUT, since the ball hit the ground BEFORE the LOS, it should be considered live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 It's a rule. Such is life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 (edited) That has to be the dumbest rule I have ever heard of. You penalize a team for making a great play. I honestly remember being taught this in football. If the ball goes past the line of scrimmage after a block, you are NOT suppose to touch it. It is a punt, it went forward. I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter if it bounced. Edited December 18, 2006 by Goopster24 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorstCoachingEver Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 It's a rule. Such is life. Thanks for stating the obvious. I think everyone is on board that the Refs made the correct call according to the rules. However, we think a rule change might be warranted in the offseason. Just opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorstCoachingEver Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 And when I say rule change, I mean if a ball hits the grounds b/f the LOS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboyz1 Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 (edited) Still doesn't make sense. The blocking player touched the ball first resulting in a punt that never got airborne. The ball should be a dead spot for the receiving team regardless who kills the ball. No way should the punting team be allowed to punt on fourth down and receive a first down by allowing the ball to be blocked period. No way that can happen. Theoretically, you could purposely pull that miracle crap to achieve a first down. That play just can't happen that way. A blocked punt can only end up in the receiving teams possession unless the receiving team gains possession and then fumbles. I think the rule was applied correctly as it is written now but it has to change so that this play can not happen again. Poor KC. LT makes um pay with an 85 yard dash to add insult to already damaged nut sacks. Man that's got to hurt. Edited December 18, 2006 by Cowboyz1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunther Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 (edited) I honestly remember being taught this in football. If the ball goes past the line of scrimmage after a block, you are NOT suppose to touch it. It is a punt, it went forward. I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter if it bounced. I just listened to Michaels explaining it again, you are correct, it didn't matter that it bounced before it crossed the line of scrimmage. Edited December 18, 2006 by Gunther Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I honestly remember being taught this in football. If the ball goes past the line of scrimmage after a block, you are NOT suppose to touch it. It is a punt, it went forward. I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter if it bounced. OK, that may be the rule but I still think it makes absolutely no sense. Use the roughing the kicker penalty from earlier in the game. Now, the 5 yards did not give KC enough for the first down, so SD gets the ball. Fine, OK, understand, this makes sense. But in THIS situation, just because the ball crossed the line of scrimmage, SD gets the ball and the first down? They never even had enough yardage on the recovery for the first down so explain how the hell they get that? If it was like 4th and 2 and they gained 3 yards, I could understand it. But they never even got the necessary yardage. Basically, they benefitted from horrible punt blocking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 OK, that may be the rule but I still think it makes absolutely no sense. Use the roughing the kicker penalty from earlier in the game. Now, the 5 yards did not give KC enough for the first down, so SD gets the ball. Fine, OK, understand, this makes sense. But in THIS situation, just because the ball crossed the line of scrimmage, SD gets the ball and the first down? They never even had enough yardage on the recovery for the first down so explain how the hell they get that? If it was like 4th and 2 and they gained 3 yards, I could understand it. But they never even got the necessary yardage. Basically, they benefitted from horrible punt blocking. They benefited from the KC guy whiffing. Like I said, football players are taught this situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorstCoachingEver Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 They benefited from the KC guy whiffing. Like I said, football players are taught this situation. Yes, but remember we are talking about guys who got 720s on the SAT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuba chuck Posted December 18, 2006 Author Share Posted December 18, 2006 NFL rules page Here's the only thing regarding this topic in the rules. So, essentially, it appears a little more open to interpretation. From: Kicks from scrimmage 4. Any punt that is blocked and does not cross the line of scrimmage can be recovered and advanced by either team. However, if offensive team recovers it must make the yardage necessary for its first down to retain possession if punt was on fourth down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 NFL rules page Here's the only thing regarding this topic in the rules. So, essentially, it appears a little more open to interpretation. From: Kicks from scrimmage My point exactly from my previous post. They did not gain the necessary yardage. Officials screwed this one up and screwed it up royally. You'll hear the league office issuing an apology sometime this week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Yes, but remember we are talking about guys who got 720s on the SAT. Haha, I think they have to know a lot more dealing with plays.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.