Pooch Kick Ruling - - Were we robbed?

[Matt in KC]

So the Bills kick off and K Thomas catches the ball down field, 2-3 yards in front of a Minnesota player who gave a lame fair catch wave (not even over his head) and who was not really trying to cath the ball. Why is that a penalty against the Bils?

 

Is there a rule that explicitly say the kick has to hit the ground or a recieving team player first if a fair cach is signaled? I found the below on-line, but don't know to what extent this is a dumbed-down version of the official rulebook.

 

4. A kickoff is illegal unless it travels 10 yards OR is touched by the receiving team. Once the ball is touched by the receiving team or has gone 10 yards, it is a free ball. Receivers may recover and advance. Kicking team may recover but NOT advance UNLESS receiver had possession and lost the ball.

http://www.nfl.com/fans/rules/kickoff

 

Fair Catch

1. The member of the receiving team must raise one arm a full length above his head and wave it from side to side while kick is in flight. (Failure to give proper sign: receivers’ ball five yards behind spot of signal.) Note: It is legal for the receiver to shield his eyes from the sun by raising one hand no higher than the helmet.

 

2. No opponent may interfere with the fair catcher, the ball, or his path to the ball. Penalty: 15 yards from spot of foul and fair catch is awarded.

 

3. A player who signals for a fair catch is not required to catch the ball. However, if a player signals for a fair catch, he may not block or initiate contact with any player on the kicking team until the ball touches a player. Penalty: snap 15 yards.

 

4. If ball hits ground or is touched by member of kicking team in flight, fair catch signal is off and all rules for a kicked ball apply.

http://www.nfl.com/fans/rules/faircatch

[bobblehead]

That lineman was not calling for a fair catch. I don't know exactly what he was doing when he put his hand in the air, but I guarantee you he was not calling for a fair catch.

[Corp000085]

it looked like he was motioning the guys near him not to touch the ball (as most players do when a punt takes a wild tragectory)

[YOOOOOO]

That lineman was not calling for a fair catch.  I don't know exactly what he was doing when he put his hand in the air, but I guarantee you he was not calling for a fair catch.

792088[/snapback]

 

 

He was pointing at the ball and telling someone in front of him to catch it.....cuz he wanted know part of it....

[Alaska Darin]

Doesn't matter. Unless that fat phuck is related to Plastic Man or Stretch Armstrong, there is no way he was going to cover the 2 yards required to get to that thing before it hit the ground.

 

Terrible call. Period. Perfectly executed by Lindell.

[Pyrite Gal]

Its a judgment call pure and simple by the ref whether a player had his arm fully extended to call for a fair catch. In retrospect with the help of the tape one can easily see he did not have the required full extension of the arm and waved it side to side even if he had intended to call for a fair catch.

 

However. it was a surprising to all (this is why it worked) call and it would be unreasonable to expect that even the ref whose duty it is to watch the receiving team players to judge whether they made a full signal is watching every player to make sure he makes the full fair catch signal.

 

I can see him keeping an eye on the KR guy at the goal line and not watching the flight of the ball to insure he makes the proper signal, but whether he is staring at the likely receiver OR watching the flight of the ball to instead watch receivers where the ball is landing he is not gonna watch the upback until the ball starts heading down.

 

Either way, he is not gonna lock fully on the up catcher until later in his signal and he has to make a judgment whether the player's hand is not extended because he made an illegal half-hearted wave (as happened in this case) or he merely caught the end of a full wave by the player.

 

In any case the play is not reviewable and the ref doses not have the advantage of the videotape, so this is a bad call but one which was reaspmably made. Thanks to the Bills D this had no game effect, but it is yet another quiver in the Bobby April sack as he once again made an innovative play that will force opposing STs to prepare for something/anything on seemingly routine plays.

 

Also kudos to Lindell for an outstanding kickoff placement to match his ver good onside kick last week. Lindell demonstrated the ability to make great kickoffs not simply last year but even the year before when he was subjected to a lot of criticism for missing a chipshot FG. He deserved that criticism, but it would have been dumb for us to cut him because he was simply outstanding kicking the proper distance and height for KOs and also pilled off a great onside kick and recovery himself that year.

[BoondckCL]

Anybody have a link for the play? I saw it but i find it easier to analyze a couple hours after the game, when i am not so pissed about a call.

[clownments22]

i really think we did get robbed. even if the man from Minn. called the fair catch it was still a fair play. you just need to refer to this rule:

 

4. If ball hits ground or is touched by member of kicking team in flight, fair catch signal is off and all rules for a kicked ball apply.

 

otherwise, every single onside kick would never work. the opposing team would just signal for a fair catch as soon as the ball was kicked and as soon as a member of the kicking team touched the ball or a player, they would be hit with a 15 yard penalty.

 

the ball was caught by our guy when their guy made no attempt at the ball. i thought it was a brilliant play and so well executed, i was much more disappointed to lose that ball just cause of how well they did it than for the opportunity to go back on offense.

[I 90]

O. K., Tubbo may have looked like he was shielding the sun from his eyes, but it is not inconcievable that it was a coached move. Donahue called for it immediately in the booth -- it might be automatic for a decent special teamer.

 

And if there is a link to THAT play, I fear for the future of mankind.

 

.

[ConradDobler]

Yeah. And is it just me, or did Lindell's kick seem more accurate than many of (mention name of past Bills quarterback here) passes as far as being catchable for a member of our team?

[Matt in KC]

I just don't get it. To overcome this, do our special teams need to let the ball go a bit more and grab it just as it hits the ground!?

 

I am thrilled with our win, but am having a hard time letting this one go.

 

Did someone say there was a show on NFLN where someone from the offficials explains / reviews odd calls / rules from the weeks' games? This sound familiar to anyone?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

I just don't get it.  To overcome this, do our special teams need to let the ball go a bit more and grab it just as it hits the ground!?

 

I am thrilled with our win, but am having a hard time letting this one go. 

 

Did someone say there was a show on NFLN where someone from the offficials explains / reviews odd calls / rules from the weeks' games?  This sound familiar to anyone?

792471[/snapback]

 

!@#$ing refs suck. End of story.

[LabattBlue]

I'd like to see the supervisor of officials on NFL Total Access break down this call like he does one or two calls every Monday. Oops..I forgot I don't get the NFL Netowrk anymore.

 

 

FU Time-Warner!

[Nervous Guy]

i really think we did get robbed. even if the man from Minn. called the fair catch it was still a fair play.  you just need to refer to this rule:

 

4. If ball hits ground or is touched by member of kicking team in flight, fair catch signal is off and all rules for a kicked ball apply.

 

otherwise, every single onside kick would never work. the opposing team would just signal for a fair catch as soon as the ball was kicked and as soon as a member of the kicking team touched the ball or a player, they would be hit with a 15 yard penalty.

 

the ball was caught by our guy when their guy made no attempt at the ball.  i thought it was a brilliant play and so well executed, i was much more disappointed to lose that ball just cause of how well they did it than for the opportunity to go back on offense.

792408[/snapback]

that's exactly what my son and I were saying yesterday...it was a blown call...also regarding this:

 

3. A player who signals for a fair catch is not required to catch the ball. However, if a player signals for a fair catch, he may not block or initiate contact with any player on the kicking team until the ball touches a player.

 

I see this play happen all the time and it's never called.

[Beerball]

that's exactly what my son and I were saying yesterday...it was a blown call...also regarding this:

 

3. A player who signals for a fair catch is not required to catch the ball. However, if a player signals for a fair catch, he may not block or initiate contact with any player on the kicking team until the ball touches a player.

 

I see this play happen all the time and it's never called.

792549[/snapback]

I have seen it called, usually near the endzone.

 

What gets me is the part of the rule about the player having to wave his arm above his head to signal for a fair catch. That dude may have lifted his arm, but wave? Fugged up call.

 

Perfect execution by the Bills ST.

[eSJayDee]

1st, I have NOT seen the play yet, but let me add my 2¢ regardless:

 

If it was indeed a lineman that called for the faircatch, it's entirely possible that he is UNABLE to raise his arms above his head due to the restrictiveness of his shoulder pads.

 

Since the rule is that you presumably must allow them their attempt at faircatching, this means that we can't touch the ball prior to it hitting the ground. We let it hit the ground, THEN it's fair game. This is actually a good rule is it eliminates the element of judgement from the refs as to whether or not the guy could've been able to catch it. If he signals, he's gotta have a chance. This is (one of) the reason(s) kickers hit an onside kick directly into the ground, so that it is immediately recoverable.

 

It actually was probably a very heads up play by the Vikings ST & kudos should probably go to their coach for preparing them for such a circumstance.

[Peter]

that's exactly what my son and I were saying yesterday...it was a blown call...also regarding this:

 

3. A player who signals for a fair catch is not required to catch the ball. However, if a player signals for a fair catch, he may not block or initiate contact with any player on the kicking team until the ball touches a player.

 

I see this play happen all the time and it's never called.

792549[/snapback]

 

The Viking player half heartedly signaled a fair catch and immediately tried to block one of our guys.

 

It was a bad call. It also changed the momentum of the game for a period of time. I am just glad that we got the win.

[daquixers_is_back]

1st, I have NOT seen the play yet, but let me add my 2¢ regardless:

 

If it was indeed a lineman that called for the faircatch, it's entirely possible that he is UNABLE to raise his arms above his head due to the restrictiveness of his shoulder pads.

 

Since the rule is that you presumably must allow them their attempt at faircatching, this means that we can't touch the ball prior to it hitting the ground.  We let it hit the ground, THEN it's fair game.  This is actually a good rule is it eliminates the element of judgement from the refs as to whether or not the guy could've been able to catch it.  If he signals, he's gotta have a chance.  This is (one of) the reason(s) kickers hit an onside kick directly into the ground, so that it is immediately recoverable.

 

It actually was probably a very heads up play by the Vikings ST & kudos should probably go to their coach for preparing them for such a circumstance.

792610[/snapback]

 

Yeah its kinda clear that you didnt see the play ... but how are you going to go against the NFL rules ... refer to the original post .. if the ball is still in flight it is fair game - fair catch or not

[UConn James]

It's just sad that our ST coach can exploit his knowledge of the rules to create an advantage for us... but all it leads to is blown calls by refs who don't understand the rules' application, which is kind of the most important part.

 

It does nothing for April to school the refs in a memo on Mondays when we repeatedly get screwed on Sundays.

 

Fecking people can't do the simplest part of their jobs.... to know the rules.

 

But no need for full-time refs in the NFL!

[daquixers_is_back]

But no need for full-time refs in the NFL!

792645[/snapback]

 

I like this idea. Make it a full time job. Pay them the darn money (we know the NFL has enough) and make them take 6 months of classes. I dont care that its long. Stop making mistakes.