Blocking FG at the Goal Posts? (1 Viewer)

[Eminence]

Well most players in the league can obviously jump up and "dunk" on the Goal Posts. So I think it's safe to assume they could get fairly high up, right? My question is: Would it be legal for a player to swat the ball down at the Goal Posts? Mainly talking about long FGs like a 50 yarder.

Like in the video for instance. Couldn't you just have someone back there to swat it down so there is a 100% chance it's incomplete?

 

[kutta]

That would be field goal tending.

 

[strong]

That would be field goal tending.

yep. it's interference if you touch the ball on its way down. or once it touches the goalpost.

 

[GregR_2]

Well most players in the league can obviously jump up and "dunk" on the Goal Posts. So I think it's safe to assume they could get fairly high up, right? My question is: Would it be legal for a player to swat the ball down at the Goal Posts? Mainly talking about long FGs like a 50 yarder.

I can't find anything in the NFL rule book that would make it illegal.That said, I don't think it would be worth trying very often. The trajectory of the ball would make it too high to touch unless it was a rare kick that was going to pretty much hit the crossbar and bounce through, like the kick in your video. Anything higher than that and it would be past the crossbar before it was low enough you could reach it.

 

[aesclepius]

It would only be acceptable if it was the hand of God.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I can't find anything in the NFL rule book that would make it illegal.

Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1, subsection (s): "Goal-tending by a defensive player leaping up to deflect a kick as it passes above the crossbar of a goalpost is prohibited. The Referee could award three points for a palpably unfair act (12-3-3)."

That said, I don't think it would be worth trying very often. The trajectory of the ball would make it too high to touch unless it was a rare kick that was going to pretty much hit the crossbar and bounce through, like the kick in your video. Anything higher than that and it would be past the crossbar before it was low enough you could reach it.

Before it was illegal, the Colts used to put R.C. Owens back there to try to block field goals at the crossbar. It worked at least once.

 

[Raider Nation]

I can't find anything in the NFL rule book that would make it illegal.

Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1(s): "Goal-tending by a defensive player leaping up to deflect a kick as it passes above the crossbar of a goalpost is prohibited. The Referee could award three points for a palpably unfair act (12-3-3)."

Looks like Gheorghe Muresan will remain unemployed.

 

[Utter Chaos]

I can't find anything in the NFL rule book that would make it illegal.

Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1, subsection (s): "Goal-tending by a defensive player leaping up to deflect a kick as it passes above the crossbar of a goalpost is prohibited. The Referee could award three points for a palpably unfair act (12-3-3)."

That said, I don't think it would be worth trying very often. The trajectory of the ball would make it too high to touch unless it was a rare kick that was going to pretty much hit the crossbar and bounce through, like the kick in your video. Anything higher than that and it would be past the crossbar before it was low enough you could reach it.

Before it was illegal, the Colts used to put R.C. Owens back there to try to block field goals at the crossbar. It worked at least once.

So it looks like it is legal to deflect the ball BEFORE it gets above the crossbar.

 

[Raider Nation]

I can't find anything in the NFL rule book that would make it illegal.

Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1, subsection (s): "Goal-tending by a defensive player leaping up to deflect a kick as it passes above the crossbar of a goalpost is prohibited. The Referee could award three points for a palpably unfair act (12-3-3)."

That said, I don't think it would be worth trying very often. The trajectory of the ball would make it too high to touch unless it was a rare kick that was going to pretty much hit the crossbar and bounce through, like the kick in your video. Anything higher than that and it would be past the crossbar before it was low enough you could reach it.

Before it was illegal, the Colts used to put R.C. Owens back there to try to block field goals at the crossbar. It worked at least once.

So it looks like it is legal to deflect the ball BEFORE it gets above the crossbar.

Unless the defender is about 10' tall or the FG attempt is 65 yards, I doubt this would ever come into play.

 

[Kevin Ashcraft]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_Stroud

The Stroud Rule. Hank Stram used to use 6'10 Morris Stroud to do this very thing.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Well most players in the league can obviously jump up and "dunk" on the Goal Posts. So I think it's safe to assume they could get fairly high up, right? My question is: Would it be legal for a player to swat the ball down at the Goal Posts? Mainly talking about long FGs like a 50 yarder.

Though if legal on a long FG it wouldn't hurt to have the D guy (ready to return if short) ready to reject a dying kick I mean put Megatron back there. He'd swat a good foot of the clearance

 

[Franknbeans]

they should repeal this rule

 

[SWC]

I can't find anything in the NFL rule book that would make it illegal.

Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1, subsection (s): "Goal-tending by a defensive player leaping up to deflect a kick as it passes above the crossbar of a goalpost is prohibited. The Referee could award three points for a palpably unfair act (12-3-3)."

That said, I don't think it would be worth trying very often. The trajectory of the ball would make it too high to touch unless it was a rare kick that was going to pretty much hit the crossbar and bounce through, like the kick in your video. Anything higher than that and it would be past the crossbar before it was low enough you could reach it.

Before it was illegal, the Colts used to put R.C. Owens back there to try to block field goals at the crossbar. It worked at least once.

What if the player was not leaping, but was thrown by a larger, stronger player? Under a strict enforcement of the rule book, that would not be illegal. If this were the formative days of football I could see a sharp owner hiring a very light person to be thrown at attempted kicks as they got near the goal posts. It would actually add an unexpected element of danger and risk to the NFL so I'm in favor of it.

 

[JbizzleMan]

Relax fellas...only 2 more days before we get our first taste of regular season football...2 more days...

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

they should repeal this rule

 

[videoguy505]

What if the player was not leaping, but was thrown by a larger, stronger player? Under a strict enforcement of the rule book, that would not be illegal.

While not explicitly illegal under the one rule quoted, IIRC, this is actually covered by another rule. Same one that says a player can't use the back of the guy in front of him to run up and over the pile to block the kick.

 

[SWC]

What if the player was not leaping, but was thrown by a larger, stronger player? Under a strict enforcement of the rule book, that would not be illegal.

While not explicitly illegal under the one rule quoted, IIRC, this is actually covered by another rule. Same one that says a player can't use the back of the guy in front of him to run up and over the pile to block the kick.

That stinks. It seems like they take all of the trickery out of the game like that. It makes for a less exciting league and as a result I am against it. I support guys pretty much flying all over the place if it means a blocked kick.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I can't find anything in the NFL rule book that would make it illegal.

Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1, subsection (s): "Goal-tending by a defensive player leaping up to deflect a kick as it passes above the crossbar of a goalpost is prohibited. The Referee could award three points for a palpably unfair act (12-3-3)."

That said, I don't think it would be worth trying very often. The trajectory of the ball would make it too high to touch unless it was a rare kick that was going to pretty much hit the crossbar and bounce through, like the kick in your video. Anything higher than that and it would be past the crossbar before it was low enough you could reach it.

Before it was illegal, the Colts used to put R.C. Owens back there to try to block field goals at the crossbar. It worked at least once.

What if the player was not leaping, but was thrown by a larger, stronger player? Under a strict enforcement of the rule book, that would not be illegal.

It would be the same penalty. The provision quoted above, rule 12-3-1(s), is just an enumerated example of something that would offend the more general prohibition against doing anything unfair contained in rule 12-3-3.The scenario you mention isn't covered by rule 12-3-1(s), but it is still barred under rule 12-3-3.

 

[SWC]

How is that unfair, though... you have a kicker who is in back of the line of scrimmage, and probably just needs to get more loft on it to get the ball over leaping/thrown players. If you are so far out on a FG try that a leaper/tossee might block it, it just adds another element of intrigue to the game. What's "unfair" about that? It's not even like they are having a guy take off his helmet and try to chuck it up like a flack cannon to deflect the ball... and I'm not even sure I'd be against that provided that both teams could do it = equal playing field.

 

[butcher boy]

Can teams hang someone on a wire from that low scoreboard thing in Dallas to try and block punts?

 

[SWC]

Can teams hang someone on a wire from that low scoreboard thing in Dallas to try and block punts?

I don't think a dead body hanging from a scoreboard is gong to block many kicks. Get real.

 

[DoubleG]

How is that unfair, though... you have a kicker who is in back of the line of scrimmage, and probably just needs to get more loft on it to get the ball over leaping/thrown players. If you are so far out on a FG try that a leaper/tossee might block it, it just adds another element of intrigue to the game. What's "unfair" about that? It's not even like they are having a guy take off his helmet and try to chuck it up like a flack cannon to deflect the ball... and I'm not even sure I'd be against that provided that both teams could do it = equal playing field.

Seriously? Wait, you're from...AHHHH...nevermind. Dude, the holiday weekend ended yesterday.

 

[SWC]

How is that unfair, though... you have a kicker who is in back of the line of scrimmage, and probably just needs to get more loft on it to get the ball over leaping/thrown players. If you are so far out on a FG try that a leaper/tossee might block it, it just adds another element of intrigue to the game. What's "unfair" about that? It's not even like they are having a guy take off his helmet and try to chuck it up like a flack cannon to deflect the ball... and I'm not even sure I'd be against that provided that both teams could do it = equal playing field.

Seriously? Wait, you're from...AHHHH...nevermind. Dude, the holiday weekend ended yesterday.

You can't tell me it wouldn't at least be entertaining to watch a bunch of guys take off their helmets and shoulder pads and hip pads and chuck them in the air like a WWII flack cannon barrage over Iwo Jima as there was an incoming enemy field goal kick assault. Given that historical context, it would not only be entertaining, but incredibly patriotic, and if it happened right after the National Anthem would likely bring a tear to many an eye of our elderly WWII veterans from the Greatest Generation.

 

[DoubleG]

How is that unfair, though... you have a kicker who is in back of the line of scrimmage, and probably just needs to get more loft on it to get the ball over leaping/thrown players. If you are so far out on a FG try that a leaper/tossee might block it, it just adds another element of intrigue to the game. What's "unfair" about that? It's not even like they are having a guy take off his helmet and try to chuck it up like a flack cannon to deflect the ball... and I'm not even sure I'd be against that provided that both teams could do it = equal playing field.

Seriously? Wait, you're from...AHHHH...nevermind. Dude, the holiday weekend ended yesterday.

You can't tell me it wouldn't at least be entertaining to watch a bunch of guys take off their helmets and shoulder pads and hip pads and chuck them in the air like a WWII flack cannon barrage over Iwo Jima as there was an incoming enemy field goal kick assault. Given that historical context, it would not only be entertaining, but incredibly patriotic, and if it happened right after the National Anthem would likely bring a tear to many an eye of our elderly WWII veterans from the Greatest Generation.

Entertaining? Sure.But this aint a friggin Broadway musical!! This is football.

 

[SWC]

How is that unfair, though... you have a kicker who is in back of the line of scrimmage, and probably just needs to get more loft on it to get the ball over leaping/thrown players. If you are so far out on a FG try that a leaper/tossee might block it, it just adds another element of intrigue to the game. What's "unfair" about that? It's not even like they are having a guy take off his helmet and try to chuck it up like a flack cannon to deflect the ball... and I'm not even sure I'd be against that provided that both teams could do it = equal playing field.

Seriously? Wait, you're from...AHHHH...nevermind. Dude, the holiday weekend ended yesterday.

You can't tell me it wouldn't at least be entertaining to watch a bunch of guys take off their helmets and shoulder pads and hip pads and chuck them in the air like a WWII flack cannon barrage over Iwo Jima as there was an incoming enemy field goal kick assault. Given that historical context, it would not only be entertaining, but incredibly patriotic, and if it happened right after the National Anthem would likely bring a tear to many an eye of our elderly WWII veterans from the Greatest Generation.

Entertaining? Sure.But this aint a friggin Broadway musical!! This is football.

If you can't respect that the Greatest Generation and a lot of proud veterans died to protect your right to watch football, and the right of players to throw their equipment and pads at incoming field goal kicks, then I don't think you truly love America, and I say good day to you, sir.

 

[Das Boot]

How is that unfair, though... you have a kicker who is in back of the line of scrimmage, and probably just needs to get more loft on it to get the ball over leaping/thrown players. If you are so far out on a FG try that a leaper/tossee might block it, it just adds another element of intrigue to the game. What's "unfair" about that? It's not even like they are having a guy take off his helmet and try to chuck it up like a flack cannon to deflect the ball... and I'm not even sure I'd be against that provided that both teams could do it = equal playing field.

Seriously? Wait, you're from...AHHHH...nevermind. Dude, the holiday weekend ended yesterday.

You can't tell me it wouldn't at least be entertaining to watch a bunch of guys take off their helmets and shoulder pads and hip pads and chuck them in the air like a WWII flack cannon barrage over Iwo Jima as there was an incoming enemy field goal kick assault. Given that historical context, it would not only be entertaining, but incredibly patriotic, and if it happened right after the National Anthem would likely bring a tear to many an eye of our elderly WWII veterans from the Greatest Generation.

Sounds like the way the Chiefs championship game ended in Slap Shot.And that's some good family entertainment right there.

 

[aesclepius]

How about Finley?

He could probably block it at the top of the trajectory.

 

[twheeler]

You can't tell me it wouldn't at least be entertaining to watch a bunch of guys take off their helmets and shoulder pads and hip pads and chuck them in the air like a WWII flack cannon barrage over Iwo Jima as there was an incoming enemy field goal kick assault. Given that historical context, it would not only be entertaining, but incredibly patriotic, and if it happened right after the National Anthem would likely bring a tear to many an eye of our elderly WWII veterans from the Greatest Generation.

This is beautiful. If there's a petition, I'll sign it.

 

[GregR_2]

I can't find anything in the NFL rule book that would make it illegal.

Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1, subsection (s): "Goal-tending by a defensive player leaping up to deflect a kick as it passes above the crossbar of a goalpost is prohibited. The Referee could award three points for a palpably unfair act (12-3-3)."

That said, I don't think it would be worth trying very often. The trajectory of the ball would make it too high to touch unless it was a rare kick that was going to pretty much hit the crossbar and bounce through, like the kick in your video. Anything higher than that and it would be past the crossbar before it was low enough you could reach it.

Before it was illegal, the Colts used to put R.C. Owens back there to try to block field goals at the crossbar. It worked at least once.

Thanks MT, I looked under Rule 9 which deals with rules covering field goals, didn't think to look under the Player Conduct rule.

 

[gianmarco]

How about Finley? He could probably block it at the top of the trajectory.

While remaining on the ground. And return it for a TD, of course.