KC's blocked punt

[dutyfree]

Let me see if I have this correct....The Chiefs block the Chargers punt, the Chiefs guy touches the ball but never has possession, a Chargers guy picks it up and is tackled well short of the first down marker. Result: Chargers ball, first and ten.

Am I the only one who thinks that's just wrong?

[slapshot]

Why is it wrong? After the ball crosses the neutral zone (line of scrimmage), it's fair game once it touches someone on the receiving team, whether or not possession is gained. That's why the receiving team will yell "poison!" on punts...as long as they don't touch the ball, it can't be recovered by the kicking team.

[slapshot]

Why is it wrong? After the ball crosses the neutral zone (line of scrimmage), it's fair game once it touches someone on the receiving team, whether or not possession is gained. That's why the receiving team will yell "poison!" on punts...as long as they don't touch the ball, it can't be recovered by the kicking team.

[dutyfree]

Why is it wrong? After the ball crosses the neutral zone (line of scrimmage), it's fair game once it touches someone on the receiving team, whether or not possession is gained. That's why the receiving team will yell "poison!" on punts...as long as they don't touch the ball, it can't be recovered by the kicking team.

Still, when it is recovered shy of the first down marker, doesn't it seem as if the ball should be awarded to the team which forced the punt and blocked the punt and never truly had possession?

I can SD gaining possession if they recover the ball beyond the first down marker.

I get the ruling, but it just seems as if SD earned a first down by it's ineptitude.

[slapshot]

Kind of. But blame the KC defender for trying to scoop up the ball instead of just pouncing on it.

[Tazz013]

Whether the punt is blocked or not is a completely moot point. The receiving team muffed the punt and it was recovered by the kicking team - first down kicking team. The same thing happens on field goals.

[leopard88]

The same thing happens on field goals.

When Leon Lett is playing for the defensive team anyway.

[Bleujayone]

Why is it wrong? After the ball crosses the neutral zone (line of scrimmage), it's fair game once it touches someone on the receiving team, whether or not possession is gained. That's why the receiving team will yell "poison!" on punts...as long as they don't touch the ball, it can't be recovered by the kicking team.

Still, when it is recovered shy of the first down marker, doesn't it seem as if the ball should be awarded to the team which forced the punt and blocked the punt and never truly had possession?

I can SD gaining possession if they recover the ball beyond the first down marker.

I get the ruling, but it just seems as if SD earned a first down by it's ineptitude.

Now let me see if I got this right;

If it was say 2nd Down instead of 4th Down and the QB dropped the ball, and it was touched by the defense but recovered by someone on offense, it then be 3rd Down for the offense not 1st Down.

Like Herman Edwards, I'm still confused how recovering the blocked punt well short of the first down marker constitutes a 1st Down. If it's still shy of the marker, wouldn't they lose the ball on downs at the spot the ball last was? If not I can think of a few games in the past where the offense got the ball taken from them unfairly...

[infrared41]

Without consulting an NFL rule book here's my take/guess...

Once the receiving team touched the ball it was a change of possession. From that time it was technically KC's possession. They lost possesion (regardless of the amount of real time they had the ball) and the Chargers regained possession. The result is Chargers ball first and ten from the spot they regained possession. I believe it works the same way as it does on a fumbled interception or fumble recovery where the defensive team gets the ball then loses it back to the offense on the same play. That said, I also know that the NFL rule book has an obscure rule of some sort for just about everything (see the "tuck rule" etc.) so I could easily be wrong.

[CZzyzx41]

This happens anytime possession is changed in the middle of a play and then lost back to the original team that had possession. It becomes 1st and 10 from the point the player who recovers the ball is downed.

This being a kicking play, if someone on the receiving team comes into contact with the ball before someone on the kicking team does, the possession changes to the receiving team. If it's then recovered by the kicking team, it's 1st and 10 from the point the player who recovers the ball was then downed no matter where that happens to be.

I think that's as clear as I can put it.

[baseballking99]

Without consulting an NFL rule book here's my take/guess...

Once the receiving team touched the ball it was a change of possession. From that time it was technically KC's possession. They lost possesion (regardless of the amount of real time they had the ball) and the Chargers regained possession. The result is Chargers ball first and ten from the spot they regained possession. I believe it works the same way as it does on a fumbled interception or fumble recovery where the defensive team gets the ball then loses it back to the offense on the same play. That said, I also know that the NFL rule book has an obscure rule of some sort for just about everything (see the "tuck rule" etc.) so I could easily be wrong.

thats what I thought too

[buildingmaint]

From NFL.COM rule book." Any punt that is blocked and does not cross the line of scrimmage can be recovered and advanced by either team.If offensive team recovers it must make the necessary yards for the first down to regain possession."

[Bleujayone]

From NFL.COM rule book." Any punt that is blocked and does not cross the line of scrimmage can be recovered and advanced by either team. If offensive team recovers it must make the necessary yards for the first down to regain possession."

The second sentence is what's throwing me off here. To me it sounds like if the offense picks up the ball, they still need to advance it to the marker to gain a 1st Down and keep the ball.

In other words if it's 4th and 4 and the offense elects to punt, the punt is blocked and the offense manages to recover the ball, they still have to advance the ball the 4 yards required of them otherwise they turn the ball over on downs.

This passage does not mention whether or not the ball has to already be touched by the other team, but if the punt is blocked, it seems a given that someone on the other team has already done so.

[lilgump]

That is if the punt doesnt cross the line of scrimmage. Since the punt did go past the line of scrimmage it can be considered that it wasnt even blocked at all. My dad is a high school coach and they cant count a punt as blocked if the ball goes past the line of scrimmage.

Since the ball went past the line of scrimmage, it is treated just like a normal punt, even though it was extremely short.

Since it was then touched by KC, it is a live ball just as if a longer punt had been muffed by the return man.

SD recovered the muffed put, First down SD.

[baseballking99]

***JUST ANNOUNCED ON A LOCAL SPORTS TALK SHOW***

the "O" will be placed on the back of the helmets. it just got worse.

That is if the punt doesnt cross the line of scrimmage. Since the punt did go past the line of scrimmage it can be considered that it wasnt even blocked at all. My dad is a high school coach and they cant count a punt as blocked if the ball goes past the line of scrimmage.

Since the ball went past the line of scrimmage, it is treated just like a normal punt, even though it was extremely short.

Since it was then touched by KC, it is a live ball just as if a longer punt had been muffed by the return man.

SD recovered the muffed put, First down SD.

yea this is what was said on tv

the officals do a pretty good job with the rules.