RULES ?: Kickoff in the SEA-WAS game (1 Viewer)

[Nemesis]

Early in the 4th qtr, WASHINGTON kicked off to SEATTLE and b/c of the strong winds the kick landed short w/o being caught by the SEA returners. The SEA returners came up and tried to field it, but the ball took a slightly funny bounce to the side. Since the WAS player (Nix) was running full speed, he was able to get to the ball on the run and ran into the end zone untouched.

The ruling was:

It's not a touchdown b/c WASH can't advance this ball......however, they get possession at the point of recovery (SEA 14 yd line).

Ok: I understand WHAT the ruling was........my question is WHY IS THIS THE RULING?

What is the logic?

I've always heard people harp that "The ball is live on a kickoff!" and now this rule contradicts that stmt.

 

[NOONAN]

Early in the 4th qtr, WASHINGTON kicked off to SEATTLE and b/c of the strong winds the kick landed short w/o being caught by the SEA returners. The SEA returners came up and tried to field it, but the ball took a slightly funny bounce to the side. Since the WAS player (Nix) was running full speed, he was able to get to the ball on the run and ran into the end zone untouched.The ruling was: It's not a touchdown b/c WASH can't advance this ball......however, they get possession at the point of recovery (SEA 14 yd line).Ok: I understand WHAT the ruling was........my question is WHY IS THIS THE RULING?What is the logic?I've always heard people harp that "The ball is live on a kickoff!" and now this rule contradicts that stmt.

Great question. How is that different than an onside kick recovery that gets returned for TD? Is it just because you INTENTIONALLY recover the kick? That would be lame.

 

[dgreen]

Early in the 4th qtr, WASHINGTON kicked off to SEATTLE and b/c of the strong winds the kick landed short w/o being caught by the SEA returners. The SEA returners came up and tried to field it, but the ball took a slightly funny bounce to the side. Since the WAS player (Nix) was running full speed, he was able to get to the ball on the run and ran into the end zone untouched.The ruling was: It's not a touchdown b/c WASH can't advance this ball......however, they get possession at the point of recovery (SEA 14 yd line).Ok: I understand WHAT the ruling was........my question is WHY IS THIS THE RULING?What is the logic?I've always heard people harp that "The ball is live on a kickoff!" and now this rule contradicts that stmt.

Great question. How is that different than an onside kick recovery that gets returned for TD? Is it just because you INTENTIONALLY recover the kick? That would be lame.

Can the kicking team advance an onside kick?

 

[The_Man]

That's always been the rule -- kind of like you can't advance a muffed punt. I think the rationale is that in the situation of a live kickoff or a muffed punt, there's nobody back to defend and it will be an automatic touchdown.

I think it's a stupid rule on the kickoff, but it's been in effect for a long time.

 

[The_Man]

The rule is that the kicking team cannot advance a kickoff after recovering it. The same goes for onside kicks. It's exactly the same as a muffed punt.

I'm just enjoying saying muffed

 

[Ozymandias]

The ball is not a free ball on a kickoff UNLESS it has been touched by a member of the receiving team. In that case, it may be advanced.

 

[dgreen]

The ball is not a free ball on a kickoff UNLESS it has been touched by a member of the receiving team. In that case, it may be advanced.

And the question here is: Why?

 

[Nemesis]

The ball is not a free ball on a kickoff UNLESS it has been touched by a member of the receiving team. In that case, it may be advanced.

So what happens if the ball were to go all the way back into the END ZONE and get recovered by the kicking team?Is it a TD?........if it is, my point is that it is very inconsistent to call it differently based on recovery spot.

 

[parrot]

The ball is not a free ball on a kickoff UNLESS it has been touched by a member of the receiving team. In that case, it may be advanced.

So what happens if the ball were to go all the way back into the END ZONE and get recovered by the kicking team?Is it a TD?........if it is, my point is that it is very inconsistent to call it differently based on recovery spot.

I don't know why that would be inconsistent. You can recover it but not advance it. If you recover it in the endzone it's a TD.

 

[Maroney=Speed]

Early in the 4th qtr, WASHINGTON kicked off to SEATTLE and b/c of the strong winds the kick landed short w/o being caught by the SEA returners. The SEA returners came up and tried to field it, but the ball took a slightly funny bounce to the side. Since the WAS player (Nix) was running full speed, he was able to get to the ball on the run and ran into the end zone untouched.The ruling was: It's not a touchdown b/c WASH can't advance this ball......however, they get possession at the point of recovery (SEA 14 yd line).Ok: I understand WHAT the ruling was........my question is WHY IS THIS THE RULING?What is the logic?I've always heard people harp that "The ball is live on a kickoff!" and now this rule contradicts that stmt.

Great question. How is that different than an onside kick recovery that gets returned for TD? Is it just because you INTENTIONALLY recover the kick? That would be lame.

Can the kicking team advance an onside kick?

No.

 

[Nemesis]

Can the kicking team advance an onside kick?

No.

Yea, now that I recall, the onside kicks that were returned for TDs were recovered by the RECEIVEING team and taken to the house (I think Dallas did this last yr).......that was clouding my memory a little.But, back to the original question: WHY can't the kicking team advance it?.........why not just make it a "live ball" on the kickoff?

 

[QuizGuy66]

The ball is not a free ball on a kickoff UNLESS it has been touched by a member of the receiving team. In that case, it may be advanced.

So what happens if the ball were to go all the way back into the END ZONE and get recovered by the kicking team?Is it a TD?........if it is, my point is that it is very inconsistent to call it differently based on recovery spot.

Yes, this happened in a Dolphins game some years back, though the ball was in the endzone when the kicking team recovered it (if I recall correctly the guy just let it go over his head like a punt)-QG

 

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

The ball is not a free ball on a kickoff UNLESS it has been touched by a member of the receiving team. In that case, it may be advanced.

So what happens if the ball were to go all the way back into the END ZONE and get recovered by the kicking team?Is it a TD?........if it is, my point is that it is very inconsistent to call it differently based on recovery spot.

Excellent question.

 

[mad sweeney]

The ball is not a free ball on a kickoff UNLESS it has been touched by a member of the receiving team. In that case, it may be advanced.

So what happens if the ball were to go all the way back into the END ZONE and get recovered by the kicking team?Is it a TD?........if it is, my point is that it is very inconsistent to call it differently based on recovery spot.

It's a TDIt's not different at all. It's possession of the ball at the spot recovered. If it's recovered in the endzone it's a TD. I don't see how the rule is different for those two cases.

 

[NOONAN]

The ball is not a free ball on a kickoff UNLESS it has been touched by a member of the receiving team. In that case, it may be advanced.

I have seen an onside kick returned for TD. I thought it was Dallas??? Has the rule changed, or was I watching a college game?Here is the rule:

Kickoff

In addition to a kickoff, the other free kick is a kick after a safety (safety kick). A punt may be used (a punt may not be used on a kickoff).

On a safety kick, the team scored upon puts ball in play by a punt, dropkick, or placekick without tee. No score can be made on a free kick following a safety, even if a series of penalties places team in position. (A field goal can be scored only on a play from scrimmage or a free kick after a fair catch.)

A kickoff may not score a field goal.

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. When a kickoff goes out of bounds between the goal lines without being touched by the receiving team, the ball belongs to the receivers 30 yards from the spot of the kick or at the out-of-bounds spot unless the ball went out-of-bounds the first time an onside kick was attempted. In this case, the kicking team is penalized five yards and the ball must be kicked again.

When a kickoff goes out of bounds between the goal lines and is touched last by receiving team, it is receiver’s ball at out-of-bounds spot.

If the kicking team either illegally kicks off out of bounds or is guilty of a short free kick on two or more consecutive onside kicks, receivers may take possession of the ball at the dead ball spot, out-of-bounds spot, or spot of illegal touch.

Thanks, Ozy

 

[bryhamm]

The ball is not a free ball on a kickoff UNLESS it has been touched by a member of the receiving team. In that case, it may be advanced.

I have seen an onside kick returned for TD. I thought it was Dallas??? Has the rule changed, or was I watching a college game?Here is the rule:

Kickoff

In addition to a kickoff, the other free kick is a kick after a safety (safety kick). A punt may be used (a punt may not be used on a kickoff).

On a safety kick, the team scored upon puts ball in play by a punt, dropkick, or placekick without tee. No score can be made on a free kick following a safety, even if a series of penalties places team in position. (A field goal can be scored only on a play from scrimmage or a free kick after a fair catch.)

A kickoff may not score a field goal.

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. When a kickoff goes out of bounds between the goal lines without being touched by the receiving team, the ball belongs to the receivers 30 yards from the spot of the kick or at the out-of-bounds spot unless the ball went out-of-bounds the first time an onside kick was attempted. In this case, the kicking team is penalized five yards and the ball must be kicked again.

When a kickoff goes out of bounds between the goal lines and is touched last by receiving team, it is receiver’s ball at out-of-bounds spot.

If the kicking team either illegally kicks off out of bounds or is guilty of a short free kick on two or more consecutive onside kicks, receivers may take possession of the ball at the dead ball spot, out-of-bounds spot, or spot of illegal touch.

Thanks, Ozy

Except that Ozy was a little off ... it is not simply "touched" but possessed. In other words, a kicking team can always recover the ball. In order to advance the ball, it has to be a fumble after the receiving team has had actual possession.

 

[Maroney=Speed]

Can the kicking team advance an onside kick?

No.

Yea, now that I recall, the onside kicks that were returned for TDs were recovered by the RECEIVEING team and taken to the house (I think Dallas did this last yr).......that was clouding my memory a little.But, back to the original question: WHY can't the kicking team advance it?.........why not just make it a "live ball" on the kickoff?

Simple, a team has to have possession. So lets say Burleson caught that ball and started running, lets say after 3 yards He fumbles the ball.Washington picks the ball up and than runs into the end zone. It is a TD.Same thing on a punt. If player does not have possession it's called a muff.Anything else?

 

[switz]

Onside kick can only be advanced if the opposing team touches it.

Any kickoff IS a live ball. However, if the receiver calls a fair catch, the ball is down wherever it is touched by any player. If the receiver does not call a fair catch, and does not touch the ball, the kicking team may recover it but not advance it.

At least those are my understanding of the rules.

 

[Maroney=Speed]

Onside kick can only be advanced if the opposing team touches it.Any kickoff IS a live ball. However, if the receiver calls a fair catch, the ball is down wherever it is touched by any player. If the receiver does not call a fair catch, and does not touch the ball, the kicking team may recover it but not advance it.At least those are my understanding of the rules.

Not true. Again it's not touches it or not touches it.It's possession. Other wise it's a muff and ball is spoted were team recoved ball.That team can Not advance ball.

 

[Nemesis]

Can the kicking team advance an onside kick?

No.

Yea, now that I recall, the onside kicks that were returned for TDs were recovered by the RECEIVEING team and taken to the house (I think Dallas did this last yr).......that was clouding my memory a little.But, back to the original question: WHY can't the kicking team advance it?.........why not just make it a "live ball" on the kickoff?

Simple, a team has to have possession. So lets say Burleson caught that ball and started running, lets say after 3 yards He fumbles the ball.Washington picks the ball up and than runs into the end zone. It is a TD.Same thing on a punt. If player does not have possession it's called a muff.Anything else?

Maybe you're mis-interpreting what I'm trying to say as I already understood the rule...........Forget the rule in place now for a second and let's talk theoretical everyone.Again.......why not just make it a live ball on the kickoff? (don't just spout the rule at me again)Anybody think it SHOULD be a live ball that could be advanced?.........would certainly make it a little more exciting knowing that either team can score on this play

 

[switz]

Onside kick can only be advanced if the opposing team touches it.Any kickoff IS a live ball. However, if the receiver calls a fair catch, the ball is down wherever it is touched by any player. If the receiver does not call a fair catch, and does not touch the ball, the kicking team may recover it but not advance it.At least those are my understanding of the rules.

Not true. Again it's not touches it or not touches it.It's possession. Other wise it's a muff and ball is spoted were team recoved ball.That team can Not advance ball.

You're arguing semantics here, but yes your wording is more specific and accurate.

 

[Maroney=Speed]

Can the kicking team advance an onside kick?

No.

Yea, now that I recall, the onside kicks that were returned for TDs were recovered by the RECEIVEING team and taken to the house (I think Dallas did this last yr).......that was clouding my memory a little.But, back to the original question: WHY can't the kicking team advance it?.........why not just make it a "live ball" on the kickoff?

Simple, a team has to have possession. So lets say Burleson caught that ball and started running, lets say after 3 yards He fumbles the ball.Washington picks the ball up and than runs into the end zone. It is a TD.Same thing on a punt. If player does not have possession it's called a muff.Anything else?

Maybe you're mis-interpreting what I'm trying to say as I already understood the rule...........Forget the rule in place now for a second and let's talk theoretical everyone.Again.......why not just make it a live ball on the kickoff? (don't just spout the rule at me again)Anybody think it SHOULD be a live ball that could be advanced?.........would certainly make it a little more exciting knowing that either team can score on this play

Ok, it's a stupid rule. But it's the rule. Why, who knows.My guess is, theres already way too many injuries on kickoff and punt returns.I think it's as simple as that. I don't think they will do anything to the rules.

 

[DropKick]

Can the kicking team advance an onside kick?

No.

Yea, now that I recall, the onside kicks that were returned for TDs were recovered by the RECEIVEING team and taken to the house (I think Dallas did this last yr).......that was clouding my memory a little.But, back to the original question: WHY can't the kicking team advance it?.........why not just make it a "live ball" on the kickoff?

Simple, a team has to have possession. So lets say Burleson caught that ball and started running, lets say after 3 yards He fumbles the ball.Washington picks the ball up and than runs into the end zone. It is a TD.Same thing on a punt. If player does not have possession it's called a muff.Anything else?

Maybe you're mis-interpreting what I'm trying to say as I already understood the rule...........Forget the rule in place now for a second and let's talk theoretical everyone.Again.......why not just make it a live ball on the kickoff? (don't just spout the rule at me again)Anybody think it SHOULD be a live ball that could be advanced?.........would certainly make it a little more exciting knowing that either team can score on this play

Because baseball has the stupid "run to first on a third strike" rule that doesn't make any sense either. Football needed something comparable to discuss.

 

[brettdj]

Kicking team can not advance a kick.

A kick ends when the ball is dead or possessed.

It is the rule at all levels of football.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Maybe you're mis-interpreting what I'm trying to say as I already understood the rule...........Forget the rule in place now for a second and let's talk theoretical everyone.Again.......why not just make it a live ball on the kickoff? (don't just spout the rule at me again)

It is a live ball.I don't know the rationale for not allowing the kicking team to advance the ball after recovering it.

 

[MG345]

Maybe you're mis-interpreting what I'm trying to say as I already understood the rule...........Forget the rule in place now for a second and let's talk theoretical everyone.Again.......why not just make it a live ball on the kickoff? (don't just spout the rule at me again)

It is a live ball.I don't know the rationale for not allowing the kicking team to advance the ball after recovering it.

It is not a live ball because the receiving team did not have possession of it, no different than an onside kick. Now if Burleson had caught it, then fumbled it, Redskins could have advanced the ball, because it would have been in play.

 

[Koya]

Maybe you're mis-interpreting what I'm trying to say as I already understood the rule...........Forget the rule in place now for a second and let's talk theoretical everyone.Again.......why not just make it a live ball on the kickoff? (don't just spout the rule at me again)

It is a live ball.I don't know the rationale for not allowing the kicking team to advance the ball after recovering it.

Probably has some roots in some rule from 1921. Maybe King Kelly's kid's know the deal.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Maybe you're mis-interpreting what I'm trying to say as I already understood the rule...........Forget the rule in place now for a second and let's talk theoretical everyone.

Again.......why not just make it a live ball on the kickoff? (don't just spout the rule at me again)

It is a live ball.I don't know the rationale for not allowing the kicking team to advance the ball after recovering it.

It is not a live ball because the receiving team did not have possession of it, no different than an onside kick. Now if Burleson had caught it, then fumbled it, Redskins could have advanced the ball, because it would have been in play.

A kickoff, once it has gone ten yards, is a live ball. (link1, link2, link3.) Whether it's live and whether it can be advanced after recovering it are separate issues.

 

[MG345]

Maybe you're mis-interpreting what I'm trying to say as I already understood the rule...........Forget the rule in place now for a second and let's talk theoretical everyone.

Again.......why not just make it a live ball on the kickoff? (don't just spout the rule at me again)

It is a live ball.I don't know the rationale for not allowing the kicking team to advance the ball after recovering it.

It is not a live ball because the receiving team did not have possession of it, no different than an onside kick. Now if Burleson had caught it, then fumbled it, Redskins could have advanced the ball, because it would have been in play.

A kickoff, once it has gone ten yards, is a live ball. (link1, link2, link3.) Whether it's live and whether it can be advanced after recovering it are separate issues.

It is a live ball up until the point where the kicking team recovers it, and then it is a dead ball. Was clarifying what happened AFTER the recovery, not before.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Maybe you're mis-interpreting what I'm trying to say as I already understood the rule...........Forget the rule in place now for a second and let's talk theoretical everyone.

Again.......why not just make it a live ball on the kickoff? (don't just spout the rule at me again)

It is a live ball.I don't know the rationale for not allowing the kicking team to advance the ball after recovering it.

It is not a live ball because the receiving team did not have possession of it, no different than an onside kick. Now if Burleson had caught it, then fumbled it, Redskins could have advanced the ball, because it would have been in play.

A kickoff, once it has gone ten yards, is a live ball. (link1, link2, link3.) Whether it's live and whether it can be advanced after recovering it are separate issues.

It is a live ball up until the point where the kicking team recovers it, and then it is a dead ball. Was clarifying what happened AFTER the recovery, not before.

OK, we're on the same page now.