There are 130 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Osgood Punt Block & Illegal Advance of Ball

Originally posted by SofaKing:
Exactly.

I understand the point linkboy is making, but batting the ball forward like that should be called differently then say, a holding penalty. Because holding does not illegally advance the ball. Batting it 20 yards downfield does.

The result of the play was just plain unfair competition. We were effectively punished 20 yards for their infraction. Makes no logical sense. Change the rule.

OK, lets say the ball is called dead on an illegal batting of the ball.

If that happens, and I'm a coach, I'm instructing my players to always bat a fumble forward since it would prevent the opposing team from picking up a fumble and running it back for a TD, and we get to keep possession of the ball if it isn't 4th down (which is actually what happened on that play, Seattle turned the ball over on downs instead of punting it).

We all would be freaking pissed if the 49ers picked the ball up after the ball was batted forward and ran it back for a TD, only for the ball to be called dead where it was batted.
[ Edited by linkboy on Dec 8, 2013 at 8:13 PM ]
  • AmpLee
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 16,042
Originally posted by linkboy:
Originally posted by AmpLee:
I must not be explaining myself correctly. I believe the Niners ought to have taken over from the spot the player punched the ball forward, not where the ball went out of bounds 20 yards downfield.

And I'm trying to explain to you why they can't, but I must not be making myself clear enough.

On a punt, the change of possession doesn't occur until

A) A player of the receiving team catches the ball

B) The ball touches a member of the receiving team and is recovered by the kicking team.

On a blocked punt, the ball is live the minute it is touched by the player, on the receiving team, and the rules regarding a fumble go into effect.

Since there wasn't a change of possession on the play (the 49ers never recovered the ball in the field of play), the Seahawks were still considered the offense and can advance the ball if they recover it.

Because Seattle is still on offense, any penalty that is called on them will be enforced from the original line of scrimmage (if said penalty is accepted), not the spot of the foul.

So you're saying if a rb fumbles the ball on offense and kicks it forward 20 yards out of bounds, the ball would be spotted where it landed out of bounds?
Originally posted by linkboy:
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Exactly.

I understand the point linkboy is making, but batting the ball forward like that should be called differently then say, a holding penalty. Because holding does not illegally advance the ball. Batting it 20 yards downfield does.

The result of the play was just plain unfair competition. We were effectively punished 20 yards for their infraction. Makes no logical sense. Change the rule.

OK, lets say the ball is called dead on an illegal batting of the ball.

If that happens, and I'm a coach, I'm instructing my players to always bat a fumble forward since it would prevent the opposing team from picking up a fumble and running it back for a TD, and we get to keep possession of the ball if it isn't 4th down (which is actually what happened on that play, Seattle turned the ball over on downs instead of punting it).
It's still a penalty and you decline it right?
Originally posted by linkboy:
OK, lets say the ball is called dead on an illegal batting of the ball.

If that happens, and I'm a coach, I'm instructing my players to always bat a fumble forward since it would prevent the opposing team from picking up a fumble and running it back for a TD, and we get to keep possession of the ball if it isn't 4th down (which is actually what happened on that play, Seattle turned the ball over on downs).

Not necessarily. Here's an idea:

Instead of ruling the play dead, keep it live. If the ball is hit out of bounds or recovered by the offense, its a penalty at the spot of the foul and a loss of down. If it's kept in bounds and recovered by the defense, turnover.

In that situation, we would have accepted the penalty and took over the ball at the spot of the foul, since it was a 4th down play and automatic loss of down.
[ Edited by SofaKing on Dec 8, 2013 at 8:18 PM ]
Originally posted by AmpLee:
Originally posted by linkboy:
Originally posted by AmpLee:
To clarify, the question is not regarding the penalty/replay of down. It's about a player punching the ball 15-20 yards downfield, being flagged for it, and the ball not being dead from the spot he punched it. If you're on offense, a fumbled ball cannot be advanced forward if it goes out of bounds beyond the spot of the fumble. It would be marked at the spot of the fumble. The same theory should apply to this play,

And in that case, the ball goes back to Seattle since they were the offense on that play, since a change of possession had not occurred (no 49ers player had gained possession of the ball, it's no different then a fumble going out of bounds, the ball returns to the offense), which is why the penalty would be enforced from the original line of scrimmage and fourth down would be replayed.

I must not be explaining myself correctly. I believe the Niners ought to have taken over from the spot the player punched the ball forward, not where the ball went out of bounds 20 yards downfield.

Illegal Bat

Article 8 A player may not bat or punch:

(a) a loose ball (in field of play) toward opponent's goal line;

(b) a loose ball (that has touched the ground) in any direction, if it is in either end zone;

(c) a backward pass in flight may not be batted forward by an offensive player.

Exception: A forward pass in flight may be tipped, batted, or deflected in any direction by any eligible player at any time.

Note: If a forward pass that is controlled by an airborne player prior to completing the catch is thrown forward, it is an illegal bat. If it is caught by a teammate or intercepted by an opponent, the ball remains alive. If it is not caught, the ball is dead when it hits the ground.


http://www.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/15_Rule12_Player_Conduct.pdf
osgood is dat doot
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Originally posted by linkboy:
OK, lets say the ball is called dead on an illegal batting of the ball.

If that happens, and I'm a coach, I'm instructing my players to always bat a fumble forward since it would prevent the opposing team from picking up a fumble and running it back for a TD, and we get to keep possession of the ball if it isn't 4th down (which is actually what happened on that play, Seattle turned the ball over on downs).

Not necessarily. Here's an idea:

Instead of ruling the play dead, keep it live. If the ball is hit out of bounds or recovered by the offense, its a penalty at the spot of the foul and a loss of down. If it's kept in bounds and recovered by the defense, turnover.

Yeah I don't think many here are saying the ruling is wrong. We are saying the actual rule is what's wrong.
Originally posted by JiksJuicy:
Yeah I don't think many here are saying the ruling is wrong. We are saying the actual rule is what's wrong.

Yup, I agree. The ruling was correct, by the book. But the actual rule makes no sense. Seattle unveiled a loophole.
Originally posted by dhp318:
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Ted Robinson said on the post game show..that is the the rule and it should be changed

Sucks

Good thing it don't matter cuz we won

That's an awful rule, but thank goodness it didn't hurt us.
  • AmpLee
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 16,042
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Originally posted by JiksJuicy:
Yeah I don't think many here are saying the ruling is wrong. We are saying the actual rule is what's wrong.

Yup, I agree. The ruling was correct, by the book. But the actual rule makes no sense. Seattle unveiled a loophole.

These.
i think we got it at the spot we did because a niner touched it there. Had no niners touched it, the ball would've been spotted where the dude batted it.
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Not necessarily. Here's an idea:

Instead of ruling the play dead, keep it live. If the ball is hit out of bounds or recovered by the offense, its a penalty at the spot of the foul and a loss of down. If it's kept in bounds and recovered by the defense, turnover.

In that situation, we would have accepted the penalty and took over the ball at the spot of the foul, since it was a 4th down play and automatic loss of down.

The problem with that is the penalty being enforced from the spot of the foul. All offensive penalties, regardless of what happens on the play (unless it's a turnover, since the opposing team will decline the penalty), are enforced from the original line of scrimmage, not the spot of the foul.

Also, an accepted penalty results in a replay of the down.

Illegal batting is a 10 yard penalty. If the ball is snapped at the 25 yard line, the illegal batting occurs at the 15 and the penalty is accepted by the receiving team, you now have a situation where the the kicking team is penalized 10 yards for the illegal touching, yet they also lose yards since the penalty was called from the spot of the foul, so you're penalizing them twice for the same penalty.
Originally posted by AmpLee:
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Originally posted by JiksJuicy:
Yeah I don't think many here are saying the ruling is wrong. We are saying the actual rule is what's wrong.

Yup, I agree. The ruling was correct, by the book. But the actual rule makes no sense. Seattle unveiled a loophole.

These.

And some how we get burned again
I think the refs enforced it incorrectly.
Originally posted by linkboy:
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Not necessarily. Here's an idea:

Instead of ruling the play dead, keep it live. If the ball is hit out of bounds or recovered by the offense, its a penalty at the spot of the foul and a loss of down. If it's kept in bounds and recovered by the defense, turnover.

In that situation, we would have accepted the penalty and took over the ball at the spot of the foul, since it was a 4th down play and automatic loss of down.

The problem with that is the penalty being enforced from the spot of the foul. All offensive penalties, regardless of what happens on the play (unless it's a turnover, since the opposing team will decline the penalty), are enforced from the original line of scrimmage, not the spot of the foul.

Also, an accepted penalty results in a replay of the down.

Illegal batting is a 10 yard penalty. If the ball is snapped at the 25 yard line, the illegal batting occurs at the 15 and the penalty is accepted by the receiving team, you now have a situation where the the kicking team is penalized 10 yards for the illegal touching, yet they also lose yards since the penalty was called from the spot of the foul, so you're penalizing them twice for the same penalty.

I see. Thanks for the explanations, because now this s**t is getting really confusing lol.

In that case, would it make sense to enforce it from the LOS instead? I understand most accepted offensive penalties result in a replay of the down, but illegal batting should be an exception similar to intentional grounding. Intentional grounding is an offensive penalty that results in a loss of a down, 10 yards from the LOS.
Search Podcast Draft Forum Commentary News Shop Home