2022 NCAA Rules Media/Fan Video

[THEsocalledfan]

Looks like the NFL fair catch rule is different and doesn't allow ground bounce. Seems like it's often these subtle differences between college and pro that get exploited.

Well, there you have an easy fix then; just go to NFL rule.

[bisonaudit]

Looks like the NFL fair catch rule is different and doesn't allow ground bounce. Seems like it's often these subtle differences between college and pro that get exploited.

…………. . . .

[IndyBison]

That Jack's one was nuts! I did not see it when it happened. Just so I understand, if the Jack in the EZ had not touched it before it hit the ground, the ball would have been dead?

Correct. Any kick that touches in the end zone untouched by B beyond the NZ is a touchback.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[IndyBison]

What do you think of the OSU fair catch on the onside kick ruling?

I had to look up what you were talking about. In NCAA if the kicking team touches the ball before it touches the ground and there is a receiving team player in position to catch it, it's kick catching interference. If no receiving team player is in the area no foul. Same applies to a pop up. That's a kick directly into the ground and bounces up.

In high school it's a foul even if there are no receiving team players in the area. And a pop-up kick is also a foul and ball becomes dead immediately.

No idea on the NFL rule. Likely much more complicated.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[IndyBison]

I had to look up what you were talking about. In NCAA if the kicking team touches the ball before it touches the ground and there is a receiving team player in position to catch it, it's kick catching interference. If no receiving team player is in the area no foul. Same applies to a pop up. That's a kick directly into the ground and bounces up.

In high school it's a foul even if there are no receiving team players in the area. And a pop-up kick is also a foul and ball becomes dead immediately.

No idea on the NFL rule. Likely much more complicated.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Just saw video. Great job by crew to get that right. It didn't matter if the receiving team signaled for the fair catch or if the ball was pooched or a pop-up. Very funny reading the comments from all the "rules experts". And another example of the announcer giving wrong information because they don't know the rule. I don't expect the announcers to know this rule in detail but don't speak like you do know it. Fans and coaches and players will take your word over a knowledgeable official who studies the rules extensively.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ht1yxwCmReg

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[IndyBison]

I expect there is a good chance this play will be include in this week's rules video if they publish one. I know the one for the officials included it. This play shows how the announcers speak with authority on the rules and how this was a brilliant move by the OSU player to signal for a fair catch and that's why it was a foul. If you read the comments, almost all of them praise the coach and player for knowing the rule. Any official who tried to clarify was chided and told they were wrong. The crew nailed this call and it's really not that hard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht1yxwCmReg

Before the kicking team can legally possess a free kick, multiple things need to happen. For the purpose of this discussion a pooch kick is kicked directly in the air and short. A pop-up kick is driving directly into the ground and directly high into the air. A pooch kick and a pop-up kick are treated identically in teh rule book.
- ball has to go 10 yards and touch the ground
- ball is touched by the receiving team
- if there is a pooch kick or pop-up kick, the kicking team may legally touch and possess the ball if it's gone at least 10 yards and there is no receiving team player in position to catch the ball

The first two don't apply because they didn't happen. The rules in play here are relative to the third option above. There is some judgement here, but the OSU player who signaled for the fair catch was definitely in position to catch the ball. The fair catch signal had no bearing on this play. TT needed to let the ball hit the ground in order to legally possess it here. If OSU had taken off down field and nobody was in position to catch it, this would have been legal.

The only thing the fair catch signal does is give the OSU player protection after he catches it or if he muffs the ball into the air. Most fans understand a punt where you can t hit a punt returner if he signals for a fair catch and you can't hit him until after he touches it. The same rules apply here. Without the signal you have to give him the opportunity to catch it. You can contact him as soon as he touches it. You also have to give him a yard before he touches it. If he signals for a fair catch you can't contact him before during or after the catch. If he muffs it and the ball hits the ground then the kicking team can legally recover it.

Still a good move by the return team player to signal for a fair catch here, but he it would have been a foul with or without the signal.

[IndyBison]

I was right about the play above. It's the first play on this week's media video. He also mentioned all the things I did above. A few other good plays this week.

https://twitter.com/SECOfficiating/s...SNIpNNM-qi7G_g

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[IndyBison]

Another one to share. There is one about unsportsmanlike conduct. I wish he gave his thoughts on the Miller play from a couple years he does speak to the factors on some of these acts.

https://twitter.com/SECOfficiating/s...QqX9ci8hHWPU3A

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[THEsocalledfan]

Another one to share. There is one about unsportsmanlike conduct. I wish he gave his thoughts on the Miller play from a couple years he does speak to the factors on some of these acts.

https://twitter.com/SECOfficiating/s...QqX9ci8hHWPU3A

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Legal grounding one was the most interesting in my book. I did not know that was a rule, but makes sense since lineman may think they will be rushing the football so will start going downfield.

[IndyBison]

Legal grounding one was the most interesting in my book. I did not know that was a rule, but makes sense since lineman may think they will be rushing the football so will start going downfield.

And the defense can read that and not cover any receivers downfield. If the offense then throws the ball to one of those receivers they are gaining an advantage. That's why ineligible downfield is a foul. But if they are legally grounding the ball they are giving up that advantage.

NFHS added a legal grounding exception this year but they still want us to call ineligible downfield if the same thing happens. I prefer the college rule.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk