The rules committee needs to review this...

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.

Hootie · 12-18-2006, 09:00 AM

Agreed 100%.

StcChief · 12-18-2006, 09:00 AM

Agreed. When I saw that last nite several of us were like WTF. That doesn't seem right at all.

ROYC75 · 12-18-2006, 09:01 AM

Agreed .......... that was costly and degrading as a player to make a play.

bkkcoh · 12-18-2006, 09:01 AM

And the kicking team must recovery the balled behind the LOS unless the receiving team touches it first and unless possession of the ball had been established prior to the kicking team recovering the ball.

**ChiTown** · 12-18-2006, 09:01 AM

Completely agree!

Unless the receiving team shows possession of the ball, how can that even be close to a turnover. It's a BS rule that drastically altered the course of last nights game.

**Mr. Kotter** · 12-18-2006, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiTown

Completely agree!

Unless the receiving team shows possession of the ball, how can that even be close to a turnover. It's a BS rule that drastically altered the course of last nights game.

My thoughts exactly.

Reerun_KC · 12-18-2006, 09:24 AM

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.

**Rain Man** · 12-18-2006, 09:30 AM

I think you can even apply the touch rule as it is now, but if they don't get a first down, then the ball is turned over on downs. It's the common-sense solution, which wasn't applied last night and cost us a playoff spot.

**Iowanian** · 12-18-2006, 09:32 AM

Dumbest Rule in the NFL.

Regardless of touching, the Chiefs didn't establish possession and fumble, and beyond that, Sandy Eggo Never crossed the first down marker.

Ridiculous.

As for blaming Ross.....idiotic. He had a ball bounce in front of him and tried to make a play....I can't imagine that wasn't the instinct of every player on the field in that spot.

If he catches that and runs it in, you're sucking his baows today.

If the punt is blocked, this rule is stupid. If the punt is downfield and the ball touches the gunner or something, it makes sense.

bkkcoh · 12-18-2006, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I think you can even apply the touch rule as it is now, but if they don't get a first down, then the ball is turned over on downs. It's the common-sense solution, which wasn't applied last night and cost us a playoff spot.

That should have been the ruling in the play last night. Enough yards wasn't gained for a first down, should have been turned over on downs...

And what the hell is a football move defined as???

htismaqe · 12-18-2006, 09:33 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.

Bullshit.

It's NOT the same as a punt because it's already BEEN TOUCHED by a receiving team player.

You just couldn't resist taking a shot at the coaching staff could you?

bkkcoh · 12-18-2006, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iowanian

Dumbest Rule in the NFL.

Regardless of touching, the Chiefs didn't establish possession and fumble, and beyond that, Sandy Eggo Never crossed the first down marker.

Ridiculous.

As for blaming Ross.....idiotic. He had a ball bounce in front of him and tried to make a play....I can't imagine that wasn't the instinct of every player on the field in that spot.

If he catches that and runs it in, you're sucking his baows today.

If the punt is blocked, this rule is stupid. If the punt is downfield and the ball touches the gunner or something, it makes sense.

not much difference between hero and goat on a play like that.... That was a turning point for the game. Either way it would have gone, it was a turning point....

**ChiTown** · 12-18-2006, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

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.

Are you serious?

JBucc · 12-18-2006, 09:38 AM

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?

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, 09:00 AM	#2
Hootie Banned Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Casino cash: $10004900	Agreed 100%.
Posts: 56,356

12-18-2006, 09:00 AM	#3
StcChief Playing for #1 Draft Pick Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Just West of Lambs land Casino cash: $10004900	Agreed. When I saw that last nite several of us were like WTF. That doesn't seem right at all. __________________ sig test for this screwy schema
Posts: 25,901

12-18-2006, 09:01 AM	#4
ROYC75 Time For Your Wake Up Call !!! Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Barn Yard Casino cash: $5719400	Agreed .......... that was costly and degrading as a player to make a play. __________________ Our society is run by insane people for insane objectives. I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends and I think I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it. John Lennon
Posts: 36,979

12-18-2006, 09:01 AM	#5
bkkcoh MVP Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Lewis Center, Ohio USA Casino cash: $9805595	And the kicking team must recovery the balled behind the LOS unless the receiving team touches it first and unless possession of the ball had been established prior to the kicking team recovering the ball. __________________ Brian K. Aspire to Inspire before you Expire
Posts: 5,506

12-18-2006, 09:01 AM	#6
ChiTown Stroking to the SB Champs! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Flatlands of Kansas Casino cash: $3333962	Completely agree! Unless the receiving team shows possession of the ball, how can that even be close to a turnover. It's a BS rule that drastically altered the course of last nights game. __________________
Posts: 39,319

12-18-2006, 09:24 AM	#8
Reerun_KC Rock Chalk Jayhawks! KU!!! Join Date: Aug 2005 Casino cash: $8301160	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.
Posts: 934

12-18-2006, 09:30 AM	#9
Rain Man NFL's #1 Ermines Fan Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: My house Casino cash: $3358491 VARSITY	I think you can even apply the touch rule as it is now, but if they don't get a first down, then the ball is turned over on downs. It's the common-sense solution, which wasn't applied last night and cost us a playoff spot. __________________ I'm putting random letters here as a celebration of free speech: xigrakgrah misorojeq rkemeseit.
Posts: 141,251

12-18-2006, 09:32 AM	#10
Iowanian Supporter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Utopia Casino cash: $4788454	Dumbest Rule in the NFL. Regardless of touching, the Chiefs didn't establish possession and fumble, and beyond that, Sandy Eggo Never crossed the first down marker. Ridiculous. As for blaming Ross.....idiotic. He had a ball bounce in front of him and tried to make a play....I can't imagine that wasn't the instinct of every player on the field in that spot. If he catches that and runs it in, you're sucking his baows today. If the punt is blocked, this rule is stupid. If the punt is downfield and the ball touches the gunner or something, it makes sense.
Posts: 61,520

12-18-2006, 09:38 AM	#15
JBucc MVP Join Date: Oct 2005 Casino cash: $10004952	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? Last edited by JBucc; 12-18-2006 at 10:02 AM..
Posts: 12,016