The rules committee needs to review this...

[htismaqe]

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.

[Hendrix68]

I agree totally on that part, htismage.

I hope they change the rule.

Not holding my breath it'll happen, though.

[Calcountry]

Originally Posted by BIG_DADDY

Good thing Herm fixed the offense.

"Thats the same offense you had last year!"

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by bunnytrdr

So does giving an automatic first down to a team for illegal contact on a 3rd and 20 that is away from the play.

Not at all similar, though.

[tk13]

Originally Posted by bunnytrdr

You're kidding. We would have been lucky to cash that in for a FG, that would have made it 7-6. The Chargers still had more than enough LT in them to kick our butts at that point.

Actually, if Ross picked that ball up, he was gonna score. We might not have scored an offensive touchdown but our defense was playing well enough to make a lead hold up. Especially if we got a lead and forced them to go to the air... we would've won that game. That still ticks me off, haha.

[Shamrock]

Originally Posted by bunnytrdr

Should the rule be changed? Yep.

Would that have made a difference in the outcome of yesterdays game, Nope.

We would still have lost.

Why should the rule be changed?

The important marker is the line of scrimmage, not the first down marker.

When the ball crosses the LOS, and then touched by the receiving team, it is LIVE for anyone to recover. Whether the ball travels one yard past the LOS or 90 yards past the LOS makes no difference.

It's a very simple rule.

Adding in all kinds of contingencies that have been suggested here (travel 10 yards, travel past the first down make, tipped vs. blocked, etc) will make the rule complicated.

How about the ST coaches make sure their players understand the rules of the game? That's the easy solution.

[Calcountry]

If ever we face a fourth and 30, just have a play that has the kicker roll out, run up near the LOS and try to squib it off of a coverage guy that is running up to tackle him. As soon as it bands off guy on other side of LOS, fall on it.

First DOWN!

If there were 5 minutes to go in the 4rth Q of a close game, I might try it if I were OC. Better than throwin a 30 yard pass into a cover 2.

[Calcountry]

Originally Posted by Shamrock

Why should the rule be changed?

The important marker is the line of scrimmage, not the first down marker.

When the ball crosses the LOS, and then touched by the receiving team, it is LIVE for anyone to recover. Whether the ball travels one yard past the LOS or 90 yards past the LOS makes no difference.

It's a very simple rule.

Adding in all kinds of contingencies that have been suggested here (travel 10 yards, travel past the first down make, tipped vs. blocked, etc) will make the rule complicated.

How about the ST coaches make sure their players understand the rules of the game? That's the easy solution.

See my next post.

[Calcountry]

Originally Posted by tk13

Actually, if Ross picked that ball up, he was gonna score. We might not have scored an offensive touchdown but our defense was playing well enough to make a lead hold up. Especially if we got a lead and forced them to go to the air... we would've won that game. That still ticks me off, haha.

If he picks up that ball we aren't having this discussion and the point is moot.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Shamrock

Why should the rule be changed?

The important marker is the line of scrimmage, not the first down marker.

When the ball crosses the LOS, and then touched by the receiving team, it is LIVE for anyone to recover. Whether the ball travels one yard past the LOS or 90 yards past the LOS makes no difference.

It's a very simple rule.

Adding in all kinds of contingencies that have been suggested here (travel 10 yards, travel past the first down make, tipped vs. blocked, etc) will make the rule complicated.

How about the ST coaches make sure their players understand the rules of the game? That's the easy solution.

The rule should be changed because it's stupid. A team should never receive a first down for making a negative play.

At the instant the punt is BLOCKED, the whole idea of muffing the punt should go out the window. A blocked punt should be treated exactly like a fumble.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by bunnytrdr

If he picks up that ball we aren't having this discussion and the point is moot.

Only because most of us still wouldn't know that such an assinine rule exists.

[tk13]

Originally Posted by bunnytrdr

So does giving an automatic first down to a team for illegal contact on a 3rd and 20 that is away from the play.

I'd agree with that too. But the NFL likes to protect the offense. Just like that "football move" call last night... the NFL is very consistent with that. If you catch the ball and get two feet down, it's a catch. Except when you drop the ball. Then if you don't get two feet down, do the hokey pokey, and write a 300 page paper on economics, it's not a catch and fumble.

[tk13]

Originally Posted by bunnytrdr

If he picks up that ball we aren't having this discussion and the point is moot.

I realize that. I'm just being ticked off. The last two years you literally could've changed one play and it might have changed our playoff outlook each year. That drives me nuts. People complain about a baseball season being too long, but at least it fleshes out who is good and who is bad. Both in the NFL and college football, you play for 4-5 months and literally one single play can be the difference between playoffs and no playoffs. That's why sometimes I think it just comes down to luck. That drives me nuts.

[ptlyon]

This morning when this was brought up I was on the "change the rule" bandwagon. Since I've decided that it was a rule from long ago, perhaps even since the game was made. So now I say leave it alone and properly instruct the players.

Now, this "football move" nonsense, THAT should be changed. Sorry, but if you catch the ball, have established control of it and get smashed and you fumble it, then I say it's a fumble. Tough **** you didn't have a chance to make a move.

This post is for the private use of ptlyon. Any thoughts like this without the written consent of ptlyon, the Kansas City Chiefs, NFL, or Chiefsplanet is strictly prohibited.

[Shamrock]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

The rule should be changed because it's stupid. A team should never receive a first down for making a negative play.

At the instant the punt is BLOCKED, the whole idea of muffing the punt should go out the window. A blocked punt should be treated exactly like a fumble.

What about a tipped punt? How much "block" does one have to have before it's "blocked" .... By wanting to change the rule, you would be adding problems with interpretation and judgement. Do we need more judgement calls added for the refs to interpret? I don't think so.

Treat it like a fumble? No. It's not a fumble. It's a change of possession play.

It's a VERY simple rule. The ball travelled beyond the LOS, a receiving player touched it, and then recovered by the kicking team. It's a muff.

Simple.

[Shamrock]

Originally Posted by ptlyon

This morning when this was brought up I was on the "change the rule" bandwagon. Since I've decided that it was a rule from long ago, perhaps even since the game was made. So now I say leave it alone and properly instruct the players.

Now, this "football move" nonsense, THAT should be changed. Sorry, but if you catch the ball, have established control of it and get smashed and you fumble it, then I say it's a fumble. Tough **** you didn't have a chance to make a move.

This post is for the private use of ptlyon. Any thoughts like this without the written consent of ptlyon, the Kansas City Chiefs, NFL, or Chiefsplanet is strictly prohibited.

The whole discussion on what is/isn't a catch does need to be addressed. The Neal non-catch was freaking stupid, IMO. I'm all for changing that crap to something realistic.

Also, address the skirts on the QB's. Early in the Jags/Titans game, a Titans DL got a flag for barely touching Garrard near the sideline (the arms extended rule), yet later in the first half, Garrard initiated contact to paste a Titans defender that had let up right near the sideline. QB's are using the rules to gain extra yards, or to hit defenders in a manner that would draw a flag if the hit was reversed. IMO, once a QB breaks the pocket, he should receive ZERO protection that isn't granted to any other player.