controversial play in the Mandeville game

Home Forums Football controversial play in the Mandeville game

This topic contains 3 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  Paul LaRosa 1 year, 8 months ago.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1100

    david
    Participant
    #1106

    Paul LaRosa
    Moderator

    David – you ask the question…what do you think of the play? More importantly, what rules under the National Federation apply to the play?

    #1110

    david
    Participant

    I believe I it was a muffed snap and that the holder was down once his knee was back on the ground.It is enforced under rule 4-2-2. The real question comes down to is it a muffed snap or an errant snap.

    #1120

    Paul LaRosa
    Moderator

    David – you’re thinking about it and that’s good, but what’s the difference between a muffed snap and an errant snap? Federation rules make no distinction as to the type of snap. Here’s what happened, and the ruling that applied:
    A holder with one knee on the ground, in position to receive a snap with a teammate in position to kick the ball for an attempted field goal, does not handle the snap cleanly; in his effort to gain control of the ball, his second knee goes to the ground; as he gains possession of the ball, he rises to his feet, rolls out and completes a pass to an eligible receiver in the EZ – result – TD. From my perspective, he did not really get possession of the ball until he began rising to his feet, but when we gained possession is actually not relevant. That is what happened, I know because I was the Referee; this play is legal. Per Rule 4.2.2a Exception 1: a holder can have one or both knees on the ground and catch or recover a snap and then rise and advance, hand, kick or pass the ball. Thanks for staying tuned in – Paul

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.