***New Year's Day Bowl Games Thread

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by truebigdog

Inasmuch as they are the judges, and it's a judgement call I would say that in THIS case they clearly were not.

*Well, that and it was pretty clear to anyone impartial that it should have been roughing. I didn't have a dog in that fight, but it sure looked like a 15 yarder to me.

I DVR'd it and the kicker never put his kicking leg down before the Auburn defender rolled over his other leg. Here's the rule:

While the kicker is in the act of kicking, he is govern the most protection under the rule. Therefore, if a player is in the area occupied by the kicker (i.e. under the leg of the kicker whose leg is extended) the defensive player has the duty to vacate the area and to avoid any contact if he (defensive player) has not touched the ball. This contact is deemed roughing. It is roughing because the kicker must be given a chance to regain his footing. While one foot is in the air he is most vulnerable.

This is one rule that does not require the official to interpret the "intent" of the player, unless it was a flagrant roughing foul which results in an ejection.