[net.sport.football] A rules question

citrin@ucbvax.ARPA (Wayne Citrin) (12/14/84)

I think I read this a long time ago, but I'm not sure that it's true, and
if it is true, how come I've never seen it?

Supposedly, if a team takes a fair catch, the rules allow it a free kick
from the point of the catch.  This implies the following situation:

Team A punts from their own 5 (say), and team B signals a fair catch at
the 40.  Using the above rule, they take a free kick, put the ball on a
tee, and kick it through the uprights for a field goal.  Since it's a
free kick, team A can't block it.


Is this all bull, or what?

Wayne Citrin
(ucbvax!citrin)

stevev@tekchips.UUCP (Steve Vegdahl) (12/17/84)

> I think I read this a long time ago, but I'm not sure that it's true, and
> if it is true, how come I've never seen it?
> 
> Supposedly, if a team takes a fair catch, the rules allow it a free kick
> from the point of the catch.  This implies the following situation:
> 
> Team A punts from their own 5 (say), and team B signals a fair catch at
> the 40.  Using the above rule, they take a free kick, put the ball on a
> tee, and kick it through the uprights for a field goal.  Since it's a
> free kick, team A can't block it.
> 
> 
> Is this all bull, or what?
> 
> Wayne Citrin
> (ucbvax!citrin)

I saw a "free" after-fair-catch field goal attempt on an "NFL week in review"
highlight show a number of years ago (early 70's?).  I believe it was the
Bears who kicked it.  I don't remember who the kicker was, who they were
playing, or whether it was successful.  I mostly remember being surprised
that such a rule existed.

				********************************
    Steve Vegdahl		      NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR
    Computer Research Lab.		    typos
    Tektronix, Inc.			logical errors
    Beaverton, Oregon		  actions of my pet alligator
				********************************

martin@noscvax.UUCP (Douglas W. Martin) (12/18/84)

     I am quite sure that the NFL record 63-yard field goal
which allowed New Orleans to beat Detroit 17-16
several years ago was a free kick after a fair catch.
Furthermore, that fair catch was on the -37 yard line,
before the goal posts were moved to the back of the end zone.
Doug Martin

citrin@ucbvax.ARPA (Wayne Citrin) (12/18/84)

Thanks to the readers who responded to my question on the free kick after
a fair catch.  Apparently it is a valid rule and has occurred at least
twice in the last 20 years.  One respondent pointed out that the Packers
won a game in the mid-1960's on that play, while two other respondents
said that regulation time in the long KC-Miami playoff game in the early
'70's ended on a free kick after a fair catch, although the kick was wide.

Wayne Citrin
(ucbvax!citrin)

kek@mgweed.UUCP (Kit Kimes) (12/19/84)

I don't know if the rules are the same now but the Chicago Bears did
just what you suggested several years ago to kick a winning field goal
with time running out.
 
					Kit Kimes
					AT&T Consumer Products
					Montgomery Works
					Montgomery, Il. 60538-0305
					..!ihnp4!mgweed!kek

wab@reed.UUCP (Baker) (12/31/84)

	The fair catch is, I believe, yet
another leftover rule from the time that
American football developed from rugby, thereby
degenerating as a sport.
	In rugby, a player who wishes to catch
the ball may call for a "mark".  To do this he
shouts "mark" and simultaneously plants one
foot firmly in the pitch, making a mark.  He
must hold this mark and catch the ball on the
fly.  If he does this correctly, then the
referee awards him the mark and the player may
then free kick from the mark.  Since the mark
is normally a defensive maneuver, most free
kicks from marks are punts, but I believe that
the player may also drop-kick or place kick for
points just as one can after a fair-catch.
	Australian rules football is almost
totally a game of marks.  There, any catch on
the fly is a mark and a player may kick for
points.  Of course, Aussie rules also developed
from rugby, thereby degenerating...
	The real difference between these
maneuvers and a fair catch is that play goes on
until a referee awards the mark.  In Aussie
rules the mark is ubiquitous, so play does not
proceed very far.  In rugby, however, the mark
is not used much and the referee may take a few
seconds to decide and they often do not award
the mark.  All the while play goes on.  Also,
the mark is primarily used to deal with a very
high punt into the opposition's half of the
field.  This means that most times a mark is
called the opposition is very close.  The
fullback calls for a mark, the opposing pack
thunders down on him, and the fullback either
gets the mark or he doesn't.  The result for
the fullback is the same either way:  Once he
has the ball and until the referee, most likely
strolling comfortably far behind the play,
awards the mark the man is playable...and most
often played.  
	This is why rugby has very specific
rules regarding which player takes the free
kick if the player awarded the mark is unable
to take the kick due to injury.  Calling a mark
is sometimes the last play a player will make,
yet if the situation calls for it a rugger will
use it and get creamed.  This is interesting
when compared to football, a game in which the
players are padded all over (no pads at all in
rugby), which has significant penalties for
roughing a player who has called for a fair
catch.


			From a true rugby chauvinist,
			Bill Baker
			tektronix!reed!wab

stevev@tekchips.UUCP (01/01/85)

>      I am quite sure that the NFL record 63-yard field goal
> which allowed New Orleans to beat Detroit 17-16
> several years ago was a free kick after a fair catch.
> Furthermore, that fair catch was on the -37 yard line,
> before the goal posts were moved to the back of the end zone.

Hmm.  The way I remember the story is that Detroit had just scored to
put themselves ahead by a point or two with just a few seconds (~10?)
left on the clock.  On the ensuing kickoff, the Saints returned the
ball to their own 45.  Their coach sent the field goal unit onto the field,
thinking that the ball had been returned to the DETROIT 45 (which would
have been a plausable 53ish-yard field goal back in those days of
goal-line goalposts).  Tom Dempsey and crew, not to question why, tried
their best at the 63-yarder, which amazingly succeeded.  I seem to remember
reading this in Sports Illustrated.  Does it ring a bell with anyone, or
is my imagination running away with me?

As long as we're on the subject of long field goals, did anyone see the
bowl game a couple weekends ago in which the game was ended by a 71-yard
would-have-broken-the-tie field goal attempt that came within a foot or
so of the crossbar?  I forget the names of the kicker, teams and even the
bowl game.  Can someone fill in the details?

Back to free kicks.  Can anyone give an itemization of situations in which
a team is awarded (or may elect) a free kick?  After a safety is the only
other situation that comes to mind (a kickoff is not a free kick--you don't
have the option of punting).  I seem to remember reading that one could not
score a field goal on a free kick that follows a safety, even if wind
conditions and/or penalties made it physically possible.

As long as I'm on the subject of safeties, someone a long time ago told me
that after a safety, the scored-upon team had the option of foregoing the
free kick, and running one play from scrimmage (effectively a 4th down
and 80 yards to go).  I have no reason to believe this to be true, but
it sticks in my mind.  If true, one can imagine some unusual behavior
by a team in the closing seconds of a game taking advantage of this rule.

				********************************
    Steve Vegdahl		      NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR
    Computer Research Lab.		    typos
    Tektronix, Inc.			logical errors
    Beaverton, Oregon		  actions of my pet alligator
				********************************