The rules committee needs to review this... - Page 4

htismaqe · 12-18-2006, 08:59 AM

Let me preface by saying:

I don't care that the Chiefs lost. They aren't a good team and this play really had no bearing on the overall fact that they lost.

The rules committee needs to examine the rules surrounding blocked punts. A blocked punt is an EXTRAORDINARY play that happens just a few times a season for the entire league. So why penalize a team for making an extraordinary play?

It's unexplainable to me how, on a 4th and 12, it's possible for the punting team to fall on the ball short of the 1st down and GET A 1ST DOWN.

The solution is simple. Instead of making the touch rule apply beyond the LOS, make it apply beyond the 1st down marker. The punting team should only be able to get a 1st down if the ball is advanced beyond the 1st down marker.

JazzzLovr · 12-18-2006, 11:00 AM

Woulda/shoulda/coulda's aside... I felt bad for Pollard.

I didn't expect us to win this game. I had hoped I was wrong, but I just didn't see it happening.

But Pollard was one of the few Chiefs that was actually trying to make something happen. This is the second time THIS YEAR he's blocked a punt for us. And he's a rookie. It has to be a little discouraging to go out there and not only do your job, but make a great play, only to have it result in a first down for the opponent.

Redrum_69 · 12-18-2006, 11:05 AM

It was blocked,,,it should have been the Chiefs ball.

That point was the game changer...and why the hell didnt Herm go ahead and review it.

I put in HALO at that point...the wife said "why you doing that?" "Well, I have to vent some frustration between plays"

htismaqe · 12-18-2006, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

I agree. The ball never reached the 22 was it? It was touched by a chiefs player at the 17, then recovered by the chargers at that mark.

Should of been first and 10 KC. But according to the rule it is not.

It is a quarky rule, but called correctly, same as muffing a punt down the field. The ball was touched beyond the LOS by a defensive player, therefore it is a live ball.

Same as the DB's running with the gunner, if the ball hits them in the back and the kicking team recovers, kicking team ball.

I always remember coaches screaming at players to get away from blocked kicks and such. (agian not saying anything about our coaching staff) But remember playing in HS, when we blocked a punt, we were always told to get away from the football...

Yeah, it was the correct call. That's why I started this thread - the rule needs to be changed.

IMO, a BLOCKED punt should be treated like a FUMBLE, rather than like a muffed punt.

CoMoChief · 12-18-2006, 11:25 AM

-Ross should not get blamed for that. He was doing what any other player would do on special teams in the heat of the moment and thats trying to pick up a loose ball.

-What I dont get about the rule is that the ball was already touched by Pollard when he deflected it, so does that mean a Chargers player could have picked it up after a punt block and kept possesion and would receive a 1st down???

-The Chargers didn't get past the 1st down maker to begin with, that rule desperately needs to be modified so the team that blocks a punt doesn't get screwed for tryin to go after a loose ball. They didnt get a first down, therefore it should have been turnover on downs if nothing else.

Hydrae · 12-18-2006, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

-Ross should not get blamed for that. He was doing what any other player would do on special teams in the heat of the moment and thats trying to pick up a loose ball.

He officially got a fumble for touching the ball.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

-What I dont get about the rule is that the ball was already touched by Pollard when he deflected it, so does that mean a Chargers player could have picked it up after a punt block and kept possesion and would receive a 1st down???

No, Pollard touched it behind the line of scrimmage, Ross touched it beyond the LOS. Makes all the difference.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

-The Chargers didn't get past the 1st down maker to begin with, that rule desperately needs to be modified so the team that blocks a punt doesn't get screwed for tryin to go after a loose ball. They didnt get a first down, therefore it should have been turnover on downs if nothing else.

Could not agree more! If it is a muffed punt, they are recovering it beyond the first down marker, they get a first down. In this case, it should have been a turnover on downs, IMHO.

L.A. Chieffan · 12-18-2006, 11:33 AM

The rule is the rule but it did piss me off incredibly. However, I'm trying to picture the play in my mind and remember if the ball kinda just came down on Ross and he had no choice about touching it or if he delibritly attempted to catch it. Anybody remember?

Calcountry · 12-18-2006, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

I didnt even get upset over the play. Which is odd. But the fact remains is Ross touched the ball regardless if it was blocked or not. Would be the same as a punt and it is touched by a chief player and SD recovered.

Every coach who has ever coached football knows that you stay away from a blocked punt or a punt that is not fielded...

Looks like Ross isnt coached very well to me.

My thoughts as well, aren't they suppose to yell "FIRE" or something when a kick is blocked?

Hydrae · 12-18-2006, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A.Chieffan

The rule is the rule but it did piss me off incredibly. However, I'm trying to picture the play in my mind and remember if the ball kinda just came down on Ross and he had no choice about touching it or if he delibritly attempted to catch it. Anybody remember?

He made an attempt to field the ball but it was too far out of his reach so he basically wound up shovelling it behind himself.

Then he just stood there for a second like, eh, no big deal I don't need to worry about actually recovering the thing.

ROYC75 · 12-18-2006, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JBucc

They should change the rule completely to where possesion has to be established by the receiving team on a punt before they can turn the ball over. What purpose do muffs and what happened yesterday serve other than another stupid turnover and momentum change that the team that just got stopped doesn't deserve?

How many muffed punts never have control of the ball........

Just change the rule to where if you recover a blocked punt, you must at least go past the 1st down sticks.

King_Chief_Fan · 12-18-2006, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROYC75

How many muffed punts never have control of the ball........

Just change the rule to where if you recover a blocked punt, you must at least go past the 1st down sticks.

54 posts later to agree with the original post.....

next thread?

redskin · 12-18-2006, 12:05 PM

-I'm not sure Ross knew that the ball had crossed the line of scrimmage. He was only a couple of yards beyond the line when he tried to field it.

-I officiate high school football and saw a play this year where the team punted into a strong wind and the punt traveled straight up in the air. The punter caught the kick behind the line of scrimmage and ran about 20 yards for a first down. There are a lot of strange rules when it comes to punts and kickoffs.

Calcountry · 12-18-2006, 12:18 PM

The rule change should simply be, "It is impossible to muff a blocked punt, regardless of where it lands".

If the receiving team gains posession, IOW, is able to make a football move with the ball in his possession, similar to a reception being deemed a legal reception, and then fumbles the ball, it is a fumble, the dude actually possessed the ball.

Calcountry · 12-18-2006, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

It should not be a muffed punt if the ball doesn't advance beyond the 1st down marker.

There shouldn't be any such thing as a muffed punt if the kick was blocked. Same as there is no pass interference when the ball is tipped.

The Rick · 12-18-2006, 12:27 PM

Here's a related question...

The scenario is it's 3rd and 10. Team A hands off to its running back* who gains 2 yards before fumbling. A player on Team B scoops up the ball, runs 5 yards, then fumbles. Team A recovers. Does that mean it's now first down for Team A?

I absolutely agree that what happened last night should be reviewed for a rule change this offseason. I'm just curious if the same interpretation applies in a different scenario...

* - Okay, we all know Team A is the Chiefs due to the fact that Team A is running on 3rd down with 10 yards to go.

El Jefe · 12-18-2006, 12:29 PM

I agree how many blocked punts do you see in a year, not many. That is a very stupid rule that probably cost us the game. If Derrick Ross could have caught that he would of scored he had nobody in front of him but lineman.

12-18-2006, 08:59 AM
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $10269900	The rules committee needs to review this... Let me preface by saying: I don't care that the Chiefs lost. They aren't a good team and this play really had no bearing on the overall fact that they lost. The rules committee needs to examine the rules surrounding blocked punts. A blocked punt is an EXTRAORDINARY play that happens just a few times a season for the entire league. So why penalize a team for making an extraordinary play? It's unexplainable to me how, on a 4th and 12, it's possible for the punting team to fall on the ball short of the 1st down and GET A 1ST DOWN. The solution is simple. Instead of making the touch rule apply beyond the LOS, make it apply beyond the 1st down marker. The punting team should only be able to get a 1st down if the ball is advanced beyond the 1st down marker.
Posts: 100,022

12-18-2006, 11:00 AM	#46
JazzzLovr Old timer Join Date: Jan 2002 Casino cash: $10004925	Woulda/shoulda/coulda's aside... I felt bad for Pollard. I didn't expect us to win this game. I had hoped I was wrong, but I just didn't see it happening. But Pollard was one of the few Chiefs that was actually trying to make something happen. This is the second time THIS YEAR he's blocked a punt for us. And he's a rookie. It has to be a little discouraging to go out there and not only do your job, but make a great play, only to have it result in a first down for the opponent.
Posts: 8,156

12-18-2006, 11:05 AM	#47
Redrum_69 Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: your nightmares Casino cash: $10004900	It was blocked,,,it should have been the Chiefs ball. That point was the game changer...and why the hell didnt Herm go ahead and review it. I put in HALO at that point...the wife said "why you doing that?" "Well, I have to vent some frustration between plays"
Posts: 6,358

12-18-2006, 11:25 AM	#49
CoMoChief Mahomes Dynasty Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Parts Unknown Casino cash: $8012254	-Ross should not get blamed for that. He was doing what any other player would do on special teams in the heat of the moment and thats trying to pick up a loose ball. -What I dont get about the rule is that the ball was already touched by Pollard when he deflected it, so does that mean a Chargers player could have picked it up after a punt block and kept possesion and would receive a 1st down??? -The Chargers didn't get past the 1st down maker to begin with, that rule desperately needs to be modified so the team that blocks a punt doesn't get screwed for tryin to go after a loose ball. They didnt get a first down, therefore it should have been turnover on downs if nothing else.
Posts: 39,166

12-18-2006, 11:33 AM	#51
L.A. Chieffan PLAY GOOD FOOTBALL Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: American Gardens Building Casino cash: $3938654	The rule is the rule but it did piss me off incredibly. However, I'm trying to picture the play in my mind and remember if the ball kinda just came down on Ross and he had no choice about touching it or if he delibritly attempted to catch it. Anybody remember?
Posts: 17,368

12-18-2006, 12:05 PM	#56
redskin Starter Join Date: Apr 2002 Casino cash: $10004900	-I'm not sure Ross knew that the ball had crossed the line of scrimmage. He was only a couple of yards beyond the line when he tried to field it. -I officiate high school football and saw a play this year where the team punted into a strong wind and the punt traveled straight up in the air. The punter caught the kick behind the line of scrimmage and ran about 20 yards for a first down. There are a lot of strange rules when it comes to punts and kickoffs. __________________ Raiders Suck!
Posts: 51

12-18-2006, 12:18 PM	#57
Calcountry Shoot the tube Join Date: Oct 2003 Casino cash: $8721645	The rule change should simply be, "It is impossible to muff a blocked punt, regardless of where it lands". If the receiving team gains posession, IOW, is able to make a football move with the ball in his possession, similar to a reception being deemed a legal reception, and then fumbles the ball, it is a fumble, the dude actually possessed the ball.
Posts: 28,251

12-18-2006, 12:27 PM	#59
The Rick Veteran Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Milwaukee, WI Casino cash: $7581320	Here's a related question... The scenario is it's 3rd and 10. Team A hands off to its running back* who gains 2 yards before fumbling. A player on Team B scoops up the ball, runs 5 yards, then fumbles. Team A recovers. Does that mean it's now first down for Team A? I absolutely agree that what happened last night should be reviewed for a rule change this offseason. I'm just curious if the same interpretation applies in a different scenario... * - Okay, we all know Team A is the Chiefs due to the fact that Team A is running on 3rd down with 10 yards to go.
Posts: 2,438

12-18-2006, 12:29 PM	#60
El Jefe Don't tread on me. Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Where the peaches grow Casino cash: $9030572	I agree how many blocked punts do you see in a year, not many. That is a very stupid rule that probably cost us the game. If Derrick Ross could have caught that he would of scored he had nobody in front of him but lineman.
Posts: 8,540