A question on penalties/challenges

[The Big Cat]

A few things:

 

On the play where the Jets player downed the ball by stepping out of bounds to touch the ball in bounds, thereby resulting in a "kick out of bounds," why isn't he consdiered out of bounds before he touches the ball? Seems to me that if the ball STOPS inside the boundaries (like it did on Sunday, IIRC), then the call shouldn't have gone the way it did. In this case the returner was out before the ball was, why don't the same rules apply?

 

Also:

 

Challenging the "too many men on the field" call. That's all well and good, but since when can you challenge that a penalty took place, and why is this the only infraction I've seen challenged? Seems to me we should also be able to challenege:

 

1. Pass interfenece offense/defense
   
2. Face mask
   
3. Holding
   
4. Offsides
   
5. False Starts
   
6. Illegal Blocks
   
7. etc.
   

 

Aren't each of this penalties as cut and dry as too many men on the field?

[StupidNation]

A few things:

 

On the play where the Jets player downed the ball by stepping out of bounds to touch the ball in bounds, thereby resulting in a "kick out of bounds," why isn't he consdiered out of bounds before he touches the ball? Seems to me that if the ball STOPS inside the boundaries (like it did on Sunday, IIRC), then the call shouldn't have gone the way it did. In this case the returner was out before the ball was, why don't the same rules apply?

 

Also:

 

Challenging the "too many men on the field" call. That's all well and good, but since when can you challenge that a penalty took place, and why is this the only infraction I've seen challenged? Seems to me we should also be able to challenege:

 

1. Pass interfenece offense/defense
   
2. Face mask
   
3. Holding
   
4. Offsides
   
5. False Starts
   
6. Illegal Blocks
   
7. etc.
   

 

Aren't each of this penalties as cut and dry as too many men on the field?

 

Good question, but I don't study the rules so I can't help. It only makes sense. It's my belief that some plays are unchallengeable but I don't know what those plays are.

[SouthernMan]

A few things:

 

On the play where the Jets player downed the ball by stepping out of bounds to touch the ball in bounds, thereby resulting in a "kick out of bounds," why isn't he consdiered out of bounds before he touches the ball? Seems to me that if the ball STOPS inside the boundaries (like it did on Sunday, IIRC), then the call shouldn't have gone the way it did. In this case the returner was out before the ball was, why don't the same rules apply?

 

Also:

 

Challenging the "too many men on the field" call. That's all well and good, but since when can you challenge that a penalty took place, and why is this the only infraction I've seen challenged? Seems to me we should also be able to challenege:

 

1. Pass interfenece offense/defense
   
2. Face mask
   
3. Holding
   
4. Offsides
   
5. False Starts
   
6. Illegal Blocks
   
7. etc.
   

 

Aren't each of this penalties as cut and dry as too many men on the field?

 

 

Excellent point. There was no call, so how could it be challenged. Since when do the zebras go back and review any play a coach chooses and subsequently call a penalty that was outright missed by them?

 

I didn't think it was a very good officiating job. I've seen worse, but It sure seemed like there was a whole lot of holding going on by the Jets O-line. When I see Williams and Stroud being tackled and falling to the ground, I gotta figure they're being held or else they're very klutzy and tripping over themselves.

 

There outta be a rule that O-linemen have to wear no-finger/no-thumb mittens. That should eliminate 90% of holding (and non-calls).

[The Big Cat]

Good question, but I don't study the rules so I can't help. It only makes sense. It's my belief that some plays are unchallengeable but I don't know what those plays are.

 

Granted, I'm sore that the Bills were on the losing end of the penalty challenge, but it seems to me that it's a slippery slope when you consider that just about every play could be challenged to assess one un-called penalty or another.

[Beerball]

It's not a judgement call, it either is or it isn't. They had visual evidence that our team wasn't ready to play yesterday and we were penalized.

 

Kind of like when Jauron challenged the spot after Fred's catch that ended up being a first down after review so we never missed on 4th and 6".

[The Big Cat]

It's not a judgement call, it either is or it isn't. They had visual evidence that our team wasn't ready to play yesterday and we were penalized.

 

Kind of like when Jauron challenged the spot after Fred's catch that ended up being a first down after review so we never missed on 4th and 6".

 

But IMO, none of the penalties I listed out are "judgement" calls. Especially PI and face mask.

[stuckincincy]

A few things:

 

On the play where the Jets player downed the ball by stepping out of bounds to touch the ball in bounds, thereby resulting in a "kick out of bounds," why isn't he consdiered out of bounds before he touches the ball? Seems to me that if the ball STOPS inside the boundaries (like it did on Sunday, IIRC), then the call shouldn't have gone the way it did. In this case the returner was out before the ball was, why don't the same rules apply?

 

Also:

 

Challenging the "too many men on the field" call. That's all well and good, but since when can you challenge that a penalty took place, and why is this the only infraction I've seen challenged? Seems to me we should also be able to challenege:

 

1. Pass interfenece offense/defense
   
2. Face mask
   
3. Holding
   
4. Offsides
   
5. False Starts
   
6. Illegal Blocks
   
7. etc.
   

 

Aren't each of this penalties as cut and dry as too many men on the field?

 

1) Too many men on the field is a pre-snap infraction. Like delay of game, offsides, encroachment, et al before the clock starts. The only other assessable penalties before the snap is the various flavors of unsportsmanlike conduct AFAIK.

 

2) An out-of-bounds infraction does not start the clock on a KO.

 

3) See#1 above. There are penalties assessable when the clock runs, there are penalties assessable when it is not running.

 

 

This whining about the OOB play that Jet player made, the stuff about NYJ taking a penalty, a Bills challenge - is getting tiring. In one of the threads, I asked - without reply yet - were the Bills really dumb enough to fake a punt from their own 24? If so, they are lucky that their challenge was upheld and they had the opportunity to punt the ball away instead of having NYJ take possession on the 27. Self-inflicted bullet, but deftly dodged...

 

I suspect there wouldn't be a single peep, if a BUF player was nifty enough to do what that Jet player did on the KO...likely praise for the heads-up play. Eh?

[The Big Cat]

1) Too many men on the field is a pre-snap infraction. Like delay of game, offsides, encroachment, et al before the clock starts. The only other assessable penalties before the snap is the various flavors of unsportsmanlike conduct AFAIK.

 

2) An out-of-bounds infraction does not start the clock on a KO.

 

3) See#1 above. There are penalties assessable when the clock runs, there are penalties assessable when it is not running.

 

 

This whining about the OOB play that Jet player made, the stuff about NYJ taking a penalty, a Bills challenge - is getting tiring. In one of the threads, I asked - without reply yet - were the Bills really dumb enough to fake a punt from their own 24? If so, they are lucky that their challenge was upheld and they had the opportunity to punt the ball away instead of having NYJ take possession on the 27. Self-inflicted bullet, but deftly dodged...

 

I suspect there wouldn't be a single peep, if a BUF player was nifty enough to do what that Jet player did on the KO...likely praise for the heads-up play. Eh?

 

I didn't post my questions with the intent of being "whiney," in both cases I'm quite curious about the official rulings.

 

On a KO, can the first person to touch the ball go out of bounds prior? If no, why doesn't this apply in situations like Sunday, where the ball was RESTING (IIRC) in play, and the player stepped out, then touched it down.

 

Perhaps I'm not remembering the play correctly, but it seems like the only way to do what he did would be to touch the ball and the out of bounds territory simulatenously. Otherwise, the player was first in, then out of bounds, or out of bounds before he touched it...

[Beerball]

I didn't post my questions with the intent of being "whiney," in both cases I'm quite curious about the official rulings.

 

On a KO, can the first person to touch the ball go out of bounds prior? If no, why doesn't this apply in situations like Sunday, where the ball was RESTING (IIRC) in play, and the player stepped out, then touched it down.

 

Perhaps I'm not remembering the play correctly, but it seems like the only way to do what he did would be to touch the ball and the out of bounds territory simulatenously. Otherwise, the player was first in, then out of bounds, or out of bounds before he touched it...

Dum rule BC.

 

A player who is out of bounds is considered OOB, that part makes sense. If he touches the ball the ball is OOB regardless of the fact that you and I can clearly see the ball sitting 4 feet in bounds. Stupid rule, well played by the jests.

 

To answer your first ? If a player goes OOB he then can not be the first player to make contact with the ball if he comes back in bounds. Least that's how I think it works. Look for a longer thread where Lori pasted the actual rule.

[2003Contenders]

1) Too many men on the field is a pre-snap infraction. Like delay of game, offsides, encroachment, et al before the clock starts. The only other assessable penalties before the snap is the various flavors of unsportsmanlike conduct AFAIK.

 

2) An out-of-bounds infraction does not start the clock on a KO.

 

3) See#1 above. There are penalties assessable when the clock runs, there are penalties assessable when it is not running.

 

 

This whining about the OOB play that Jet player made, the stuff about NYJ taking a penalty, a Bills challenge - is getting tiring. In one of the threads, I asked - without reply yet - were the Bills really dumb enough to fake a punt from their own 24? If so, they are lucky that their challenge was upheld and they had the opportunity to punt the ball away instead of having NYJ take possession on the 27. Self-inflicted bullet, but deftly dodged...

 

I suspect there wouldn't be a single peep, if a BUF player was nifty enough to do what that Jet player did on the KO...likely praise for the heads-up play. Eh?

 

 

Oh, kudos to Washington no doubt for knowing the rule and doing what he did to draw the penalty. The problem is that the rule itself is just dumb.

[The Big Cat]

Oh, kudos to Washington no doubt for knowing the rule and doing what he did to draw the penalty. The problem is that the rule itself is just dumb.

 

 

That's all I needed to hear!

[The Big Cat]

Dum rule BC.

 

A player who is out of bounds is considered OOB, that part makes sense. If he touches the ball the ball is OOB regardless of the fact that you and I can clearly see the ball sitting 4 feet in bounds. Stupid rule, well played by the jests.

 

To answer your first ? If a player goes OOB he then can not be the first player to make contact with the ball if he comes back in bounds. Least that's how I think it works. Look for a longer thread where Lori pasted the actual rule.

 

do you know where I might find this?

[Beerball]

That's all I needed to hear!

[Beerball]

do you know where I might find this?

here

[stuckincincy]

I didn't post my questions with the intent of being "whiney," in both cases I'm quite curious about the official rulings.

 

On a KO, can the first person to touch the ball go out of bounds prior? If no, why doesn't this apply in situations like Sunday, where the ball was RESTING (IIRC) in play, and the player stepped out, then touched it down.

 

Perhaps I'm not remembering the play correctly, but it seems like the only way to do what he did would be to touch the ball and the out of bounds territory simulatenously. Otherwise, the player was first in, then out of bounds, or out of bounds before he touched it...

 

A player who was legitimately on the field prior to a snap (a kicker kicking the ball is a snap) who is out of bounds is considered to be as out of bounds as the guy with a camera filming or any player on the bench.

 

If the Jet that made the nifty play went out of bounds, came back in, then went out again...dead ball at the spot he touched it.

 

I didn't see the game. Usually, when this happens, there is no member of the kicking team in the vicinity. If there is, it's a lesson learned about chasing after and covering a ball on the field, wherever it may lie.

 

It's a rare happenstance. I've only seen it a handful of times through the years.

 

I can't see changing rules for such an unusual thing. I prefer to credit the player who when the situation presented itself, did the deed.

[The Big Cat]

here

 

Thanks, BB- from what I read though, it doesn't explain why the rule about not being the first touch the ball after being out of bounds doesn't apply. Unless I'm mistaken.

[stuckincincy]

Oh, kudos to Washington no doubt for knowing the rule and doing what he did to draw the penalty. The problem is that the rule itself is just dumb.

 

DID the Bills fake a punt on their own 24?

 

Give me an answer, people!!!

 

[The Big Cat]

A player who was legitimately on the field prior to a snap (a kicker kicking the ball is a snap) who is out of bounds is considered to be as out of bounds as the guy with a camera filming or any player on the bench.

 

If the Jet that made the nifty play went out of bounds, came back in, then went out again...dead ball at the spot he touched it.

 

I didn't see the game. Usually, when this happens, there is no member of the kicking team in the vicinity. If there is, it's a lesson learned about chasing after and covering a ball on the field, wherever it may lie.

 

It's a rare happenstance. I've only seen it a handful of times through the years.

 

I can't see changing rules for such an unusual thing. I prefer to credit the player who when the situation presented itself, did the deed.

 

IIRC, he put one foot out of bounds, then knealt down and touched the ball. Now that I think about it, ne never techincally came back in bounds first, so I guess that's where the loop hole exists.

[Beerball]

Thanks, BB- from what I read though, it doesn't explain why the rule about not being the first touch the ball after being out of bounds doesn't apply. Unless I'm mistaken.

becausin he never came back on the field. If he had...then no penalty.

 

It's dum plane and simple.

[TC in St. Louis]

1) Too many men on the field is a pre-snap infraction. Like delay of game, offsides, encroachment, et al before the clock starts. The only other assessable penalties before the snap is the various flavors of unsportsmanlike conduct AFAIK.

 

2) An out-of-bounds infraction does not start the clock on a KO.

 

3) See#1 above. There are penalties assessable when the clock runs, there are penalties assessable when it is not running.

 

 

This whining about the OOB play that Jet player made, the stuff about NYJ taking a penalty, a Bills challenge - is getting tiring. In one of the threads, I asked - without reply yet - were the Bills really dumb enough to fake a punt from their own 24? If so, they are lucky that their challenge was upheld and they had the opportunity to punt the ball away instead of having NYJ take possession on the 27. Self-inflicted bullet, but deftly dodged...

 

I suspect there wouldn't be a single peep, if a BUF player was nifty enough to do what that Jet player did on the KO...likely praise for the heads-up play. Eh?

 

Dumb enough to fake a punt? He made the first down. I liked the call. Moorman made the first down. The holding penalty is what caused the review and all that followed.