OT: Onside kick last night

[fourhour]

They've been practicing that play since training in August, then watched the films and the tendencies of the returner.

 

[neuronet]

They were discussing this on the Dan Patrick show this morning and here's a link:



Sweeney explained that Clemson ran a play like that last year, a short "pop up" kick, and were penalized when they grabbed the ball as an opponent was going for it. They were called for interfering with the opportunity to make the catch. Apparently that is a thing, when the kick is all air and is not bounced, even if you don't call for a fair catch (someone correct me if I am wrong), the receiving team is entitled to a chance to make a play on the ball in the air if its never bounced. In this case, though, there was nobody on the receiving team anywhere near enough to be considered to have been interfered with. If nobody is making a play on the ball, nobody is interfering anyone from making a play on the ball.

Wow, in that case it was a crazy play...didn't realize the rule there.

 

[Ring 6]

They were discussing this on the Dan Patrick show this morning and here's a link:



Sweeney explained that Clemson ran a play like that last year, a short "pop up" kick, and were penalized when they grabbed the ball as an opponent was going for it. They were called for interfering with the opportunity to make the catch. Apparently that is a thing, when the kick is all air and is not bounced, even if you don't call for a fair catch (someone correct me if I am wrong), the receiving team is entitled to a chance to make a play on the ball in the air if its never bounced. In this case, though, there was nobody on the receiving team anywhere near enough to be considered to have been interfered with. If nobody is making a play on the ball, nobody is interfering anyone from making a play on the ball.

Pretty sure you are wrong. The ball is live and everyone has equal right to it. What you cannot do is hit the guy trying to make the catch, although we did that when we ran the play because the refs were as confused as everyone else and wouldn't call it.
Swiney is probably misremembering and his player was penalized for hitting the guy ready to make the catch. Think of it like a pass and the PI rules apply.

 

[Concussion Protocol]

They were discussing this on the Dan Patrick show this morning and here's a link:



Sweeney explained that Clemson ran a play like that last year, a short "pop up" kick, and were penalized when they grabbed the ball as an opponent was going for it. They were called for interfering with the opportunity to make the catch. Apparently that is a thing, when the kick is all air and is not bounced, even if you don't call for a fair catch (someone correct me if I am wrong), the receiving team is entitled to a chance to make a play on the ball in the air if its never bounced. In this case, though, there was nobody on the receiving team anywhere near enough to be considered to have been interfered with. If nobody is making a play on the ball, nobody is interfering anyone from making a play on the ball.

Not crazy about refs making that judgement. I wouldn't mind seeing the rule be that the ball needs to either contact an opposing player or the ground first. Score one for Saban though, he knew the rules better than his opponent. Sounds familiar.

 

[Ring 6]

I think the Jets did something similar in a game vs the Colts in 2006.

Its really what Ebner did with the dropkick only he kicked it too far.

 

[Concussion Protocol]

Its really what Ebner did with the dropkick only he kicked it too far.

But Ebner drop kicked it off the ground. Doesn't that completely change the rules of receiving the kick?

 

[Ring 6]

Not crazy about refs making that judgement. I wouldn't mind seeing the rule be that the ball needs to either contact an opposing player or the ground first. Score one for Saban though, he knew the rules better than his opponent. Sounds familiar.

I don't think there is a judgment to make. Its a free ball. Swiney doesn't understand the rule, and I'm sure his version of that play isn't what really happened.
The rule is fine, consider it like a forward pass to the return team player. You have as much right to the ball as he does, you can'intercept' it but not commit the equivalent of PI.

 

[Ring 6]

But Ebner drop kicked it off the ground. Doesn't that completely change the rules of receiving the kick?

No, he could have kicked it right off the tee if he wanted to. No difference. A kickoff is a live ball, the ground has nothing to do with it.

 

[Concussion Protocol]

No

I always thought that once a kickoff hit the ground and passed beyond 10 yards, the receiving team no longer has a right to field it unfettered.

 

[Ring 6]

But Ebner drop kicked it off the ground. Doesn't that completely change the rules of receiving the kick?

Why do you think it changes the rules? The rules are a kick off is a free ball. There is nothing in the rules about any difference if the ball does or doesn't hit the ground.

 

[aluminum seats]

If the Pats did it people would say Belichick was arrogant.

 

[XLIX]

Curious for you experts here, is this a perfect kick or poor coverage by Clemson or some combination of the two? Real gutsy call last night.

I'm surprised that kick didn't really really upset Clemson and motivate them to win the game. After all, according to some, it was Belichick's onside kick that motivated Philly and led them to start really really trying.

 

[Concussion Protocol]

Why do you think it changes the rules? The rules are a kick off is a free ball. There is nothing in the rules about any difference if the ball does or doesn't hit the ground.

I guess the only difference is vis-a-vis fair catches. Ebner's kick could not be fair caught.

 

[Ring 6]

I guess the only difference is vis-a-vis fair catches. Ebner's kick could not be fair caught.

I'm not sure about that.

 

[XLIX]

Why do you think it changes the rules? The rules are a kick off is a free ball. There is nothing in the rules about any difference if the ball does or doesn't hit the ground.

Yes there is. If it doesn't hit the ground, the receiving team can call a fair catch. Also, much like on a punt, if it doesn't hit the ground, the kicking team cannot interfere with a receiver's right to get into position to make the catch (even without a fair catch signal).

That's why so many onside kicks try to drill the ball into the ground and then get it to pop up into the air.

 

[Ring 6]

I always thought that once a kickoff hit the ground and passed beyond 10 yards, the receiving team no longer has a right to field it unfettered.

They never have the right to field it unfettered. Kicking team cannot touch it first until it goes 10 yards (but receiving team must be more than 10 yards away before the kick). Neither team can interfere with the right to catch the ball in the air, just like a forward pass. You just never see it applied to the kicking team because no one can kick it high and short enough other than on a play like this.

 

[Ring 6]

Yes there is. If it doesn't hit the ground, the receiving team can call a fair catch. Also, much like on a punt, if it doesn't hit the ground, the kicking team cannot interfere with a receiver's right to get into position to make the catch (even without a fair catch signal).

That's why so many onside kicks try to drill the ball into the ground and then get it to pop up into the air.

Kicking team has equal right to the ball as the receiving team. Agree on the fair catch rule, but without one the kicking team player has equal right to the ball.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Pretty sure you are wrong. The ball is live and everyone has equal right to it. What you cannot do is hit the guy trying to make the catch, although we did that when we ran the play because the refs were as confused as everyone else and wouldn't call it.
Swiney is probably misremembering and his player was penalized for hitting the guy ready to make the catch. Think of it like a pass and the PI rules apply.

If the guy trying to catch the ball made a signal for a fair catch it would have been a penalty ( if it had NOT hit the ground). Otherwise it is every man for himself. I was under the impression that for the kicking team to recover it had to;
1) either go ten yards or be touched by the receiving team
AND
2) hit the ground first unless it was touched by the receiving team.
In last night's case, I thought it was popped up and caught 15 yards downfield (meeting condition #1) but didn't hit the ground.
At first I thought Dabo was complaining that it didn't hit the ground......Guess I have to look up the rule.

 

[Ring 6]

If the guy trying to catch the ball made a signal for a fair catch it would have been a penalty ( if it had NOT hit the ground). Otherwise it is every man for himself. I was under the impression that for the kicking team to recover it had to;
1) either go ten yards or be touched by the receiving team
AND
2) hit the ground first unless it was touched by the receiving team.
In last night's case, I thought it was popped up and caught 15 yards downfield (meeting condition #1) but didn't hit the ground.
At first I thought Dabo was complaining that it didn't hit the ground......Guess I have to look up the rule.

Doesn't have to hit the ground. The restriction would be if a guy is standing under it waiting to catch it you cant hit him before the ball gets there, just like a pass, but you can cut in front of him and catch it or compete with him to get to the spot if he isn't camped out.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Doesn't have to hit the ground.

It seems like did, at least in the NFL in 2003. has the rule changed? edit: the article doesn't say if a Tampa player was in position to make a play on the ball


This article may be relevant:

Oops: NFL admits error in onside kick call


The NFL has admitted that game officials made a critical error late in the Oct. 6 Monday night game between the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the Indianapolis Colts.

With 3:37 left in the fourth quarter and the Bucs leading 35-21, Colts placekicker Mike Vanderjagt's onside kick sailed airborne and was caught by Colts safety Idrees Bashir at the Indianapolis 42.

The Colts took advantage, driving 58 yards for a touchdown and eventually became the first team in league history to rally from 21 points behind in the final four minutes of regulation. They won
38-35 in overtime.

Mike Pereira, the NFL's director of officiating, told the San Francisco Chronicle on Tuesday that the game's officials failed to apply Rule 10, Section 1, Article 4, which says that on that type of an onside kick, the receiving team must be given the chance to catch the ball if the ball does not touch the ground.

A kicking team is allowed to recover an onside kick providing the ball has traveled 10 yards and has hit the ground.

Vanderjagt's kick did not hit the ground, and so the Colts should have been penalized 15 yards from the spot of the foul for interfereing with the Buc's right to catch the ball, according to the NFL.

That penalty would have given Tampa Bay the ball at the Indianapolis 27 yard line, the paper reported.

Pereira told the paper the play was not subject to review under the instant-replay rule.

Bucs coach Jon Gruden told the paper the team can't afford to look back whether an error was made or not.

"I don't know what you can do," Gruden told the paper. "There was a lot of screaming down there, and in the play that involved (defensive end) Simeon (Rice). (We were) trying to get them to look at the instant replay up there. Again, that game is over, I'm ready to get it out of here. I don't want to talk about it anymore.

"At the same time, with the officials, you understand that they have a very hard job to do," Gruden said. "Sometimes you wish there was no such thing as instant replay. All it does is prolong the agony."