Illegal touching on punt

[wsjmsu75]

I know it doesn't matter, but I'm just curious after watching the replay, why did the refs claim that there was illegal touching by us on that play?

 

[thekimmer]

I wondered that myself...

I know it doesn't matter, but I'm just curious after watching the replay, why did the refs claim that there was illegal touching by us on that play?

My guess is the crew was rattled and was just throwing words out there.

 

[wsjmsu75]

My guess is the crew was rattled and was just throwing words out there.

Or maybe just a knee jerk reaction on their part to cover up the fact that they totally screwed up? I mean, best I could tell our guy who touched it first just batted the ball away from the goal line. Nothing illegal there that I know of. Then our other player put his hand on the ball as he knelt to down it. Nothing illegal there either that I know of.

 

[MagnificentBastard]

By definition illegal touching is anytime the kicking team touches the ball before the receiving team touches it. It isn't a foul that is penalized. However the receiving team always has the option of taking the ball where it was illegally touched as opposed to where the ball is blown dead at the end of the play.

 

[Jddrew1142]

Its illegal touching when you bat a punted ball like we did to keep it out of the endzone. This results in the returning team to be able to grab the ball with no repercussions. Had he tried to grab it and fumbled and we recovered. Memphis would retain possession.

 

[Seinfeld]

Exactly, and while you don’t see it often, this is why there is absolutely nothing to lose at that point by picking up the ball and trying to run if you’re the receiving team. Even if you run it for 20 yards, get leveled, and fumble it, you still have the option of taking possession of the ball at the spot of the original illegal touch.

 

[Jddrew1142]

Makes you wonder why teams aren't coached to do it every single time.

 

[wsjmsu75]

By definition illegal touching is anytime the kicking team touches the ball before the receiving team touches it. It isn't a foul that is penalized. However the receiving team always has the option of taking the ball where it was illegally touched as opposed to where the ball is blown dead at the end of the play.

First of all, a foul that is not penalized? Huh? And second of all, I've seen that same exact kind of play at all levels of football hundreds or thousands of times and nothing about "illegal touching" is ever mentioned. I know I'm nit picking, but it was just another level of confusion in a total ref **** show.

 

[wsjmsu75]

Its illegal touching when you bat a punted ball like we did to keep it out of the endzone. This results in the returning team to be able to grab the ball with no repercussions. Had he tried to grab it and fumbled and we recovered. Memphis would retain possession.

Ok, so it just means that it is still a live ball at that point and the receiving team has options to handle the ball until it is downed, with no possible turnover repercussions. But there is never a yardage penalty assessed against the punt coverage team when this happens. Got it, I think.

This leads me to another question though. It is legal for the punt coverage team to catch the ball in the air before it goes into the endzone, as long as the punt receiver has moved away and is not calling for a fair catch or still attempting a return. Right?

Eta- All of this got me to thinking that the best thing that could have happened for us on that play would have been for none of our players to have ever touched the ball. Just let it die there or go into the endzone for a touchback. Not saying that lets the refs off the hook. They still screwed up royally. And I'm saying this in hindsight of the fact that the refs screwed it all up.

 

[paindonthurt_]

if the players picks it up and takes possession and then fumbles, do they really get the option to take it back to the illegal touched spot?

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

Yep!

 

[CharlieWinfield]

Old article, but I thought pretty good explanation. . .

https://www.musiccitymiracles.com/2...now-you-wanted-to-know-about-illegal-touching

 

[Villagedawg]

Illegal touching isn't a foul. It is a violation.

I know it doesn't matter, but I'm just curious after watching the replay, why did the refs claim that there was illegal touching by us on that play?

The result of which is that the receiving team has the option to take the ball at the spot of illegal touching. In high school rules, it's called first touching, but the results are the same.

 

[Villagedawg]

It rarely gets mentioned because it's usually such a routine play, but that is what it is called, and that is what rule is being applied every time someone "downs" a punt.

 

[Dawg1969]

Read the article and won't even address the touching issue . My problem is that fouls were made by the receiving team. Same #0n field at the same time and to many men on the field , thus play negated.

 

[Villagedawg]

I agree.

Read the article and won't even address the touching issue . My problem is that fouls were made by the receiving team. Same #0n field at the same time and to many men on the field , thus play negated.

As well as the inadvertent signal. I'm only referring only to whether or not the Memphis player had the right to advance the ball. There were, no doubt, other mess ups on the play. Missing those fouls as well as the inadvertent signal.

 

[thekimmer]

I absolutely learned something new with this which I find astounding after half a century of playing and watching football and seeing thousands of punt plays. I suppose the receiving team doesn't pick up the ball and run with it after the kicking team touches it is because usually it is a ball batted forward and they don't want risk having to take it back at that point.

The thing that does not make sense, that I challenge, is the notion that the receiving team retains possession no matter what, even if they pick it up and carry it for some distance and then fumble it. It does make sense that the receiving team can ATTEMPT to pick the ball up with impunity if its touched by the kicking team first but once they actually possess it the fumble rule has to apply.

 

[kired]

I've heard it called the "anti-muff" - receiving team has nothing to lose if they drop it or fumble.

I've only seen it in high school a few times where you've got guys who can't punt a ball 20 yards. Punt hits a player from the kicking team, then returner tries to pick it up but fumbles it - and all hell breaks lose. Refs and (some) coaches know the rule but no one else does. So all the fans are confused and pissed off.

 

[mstateglfr]

I absolutely learned something new with this which I find astounding after half a century of playing and watching football and seeing thousands of punt plays. I suppose the receiving team doesn't pick up the ball and run with it after the kicking team touches it is because usually it is a ball batted forward and they don't want risk having to take it back at that point.

The thing that does not make sense, that I challenge, is the notion that the receiving team retains possession no matter what, even if they pick it up and carry it for some distance and then fumble it. It does make sense that the receiving team can ATTEMPT to pick the ball up with impunity if its touched by the kicking team first but once they actually possess it the fumble rule has to apply.

I guess you can think of it as having a similar result to when the defense is offsides. Its effectively a free play for the offense and if anything bad happens(interception), the offense can just accept the penalty and the bad result goes poof and disappears.

 

[CochiseCowbell]

I've heard it called the "anti-muff" -

All these years later and Men in Tights is still teaching us:

 

[tcdog70]

It is called "FIRST" touching.. it is not illegal. the reason some of you have never seen it before is because most Coaches don't know the rules. any person receiving the punt should be coached that when the kickers first touch a ball--then pick it up and run.. If you fumble you still have the option to take the ball at the spot of first touching(thus the bean bag). another rule that is obscure--is an awarded fair catch--where when you fair catch a ball you have the option to place it down and have a free kick off the tee--just like a kickoff and if the ball goes through the uprights it is 3 points. I've seen it done and I've see plenty of times where it could be done --but---the coach doesn't know the rule.

 

[Villagedawg]

Sorry, but you are incorrect. It is called first touching under NFHS (high school rules). Under NCAA, it is, in fact, illegal touching. It also incorrect that you can choose a free kick after a fair catch under NCAA rules. They took that out a few years ago. Under NFHS, the free kick option is still in place. You are 100% right that the coaches know the rules about as well as the average internet poster.

Edited to add the NCAA language.

[FONT=&quot]NCAA Approved ruling 6-3-1[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]“ARTICLE 2. Beyond the Neutral Zone[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]No inbounds player of the kicking team shall touch a scrimmage kick that has crossed the neutral zone before it touches an opponent. This is illegal touching, a violation that, when the ball becomes dead, gives the receiving team the privilege of taking the ball at the spot of the violation (Exception: Rule 6-3-4) (A.R. 2-12-2:I) (A.R. 6-3-2:I).[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]This privilege is cancelled if there is an accepted penalty for a live-ball foul by either team (A.R. 6-3-2:I-IV) (A.R. 6-3-11:I-III).[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The privilege is cancelled if there are offsetting fouls.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Illegal touching on a try, in extra periods, or in Team A’s end zone is ignored.“[/FONT]

 

[thekimmer]

Put that on the list of stupid sports rules that need to be changed.....

I've heard it called the "anti-muff" - receiving team has nothing to lose if they drop it or fumble.

I've only seen it in high school a few times where you've got guys who can't punt a ball 20 yards. Punt hits a player from the kicking team, then returner tries to pick it up but fumbles it - and all hell breaks lose. Refs and (some) coaches know the rule but no one else does. So all the fans are confused and pissed off.

Right next to can advance to first on a 'dropped' strike three in baseball

Not all of the rule, just the part where they can pick up the ball and carry it for 99 yards and can't lose possession. That is plain ridiculous.

 

[Villagedawg]

The logic, whether you agree with or not, might go something like this. You have given up your right to the ball when you scrimmage kicked it, crossed the neutral zone. You touching the kick without giving R a chance to play the ball is interfering with their right to play the ball you kicked. If you do that they should then have the right to take the ball at the spot where you began your interference with the kick.