NCAA Rules for Kick Catch Interference ( You make the call)

[SpotHogCard]

Thought I would post the actual NCAA Rule here and let you decide.

Link:

RULE 6 - Kicks :: NCAA Football Rules Online

rulebook.github.io

RULING: Foul by A92 for interference with the opportunity to catch a kick. Penalty—15 yards from the spot of the foul, which is the 25-yard line. X. Punt receiver B44 is standing at his 30-yard line in position to catch the kick. Defender A11 races down the field to cover the punt and reaches a point about a foot directly in front of B44 as the ball descends. B44 makes the catch without having to adjust his position or manner of catching the ball because of the presence of A11, who does not pull back to give B44 more room. RULING: Foul for kick-catch interference. A11 entered the one-yard area directly in front of receiver B44. 15-yard penalty. XI. Punt receiver B22 is at the B-30 awaiting the punt as it makes its downward flight and his teammate B88 is three yards in front of him at the B-33. Down field to cover the kick, A44 legally blocks B88 into B22 just as the ball reaches him. The ball hits B22 in the shoulder and bounces away. Team A recovers at the B-25.



Adding this


RULING: Legal play; no kick- catch interference. A88 is closer than one yard to B22 but is not directly in front of him. He does not affect B22’s opportunity to catch the ball. First and 10 for Team B at the B-32. XIII. B44 is in position to catch a punt at the B-25. While the ball is still very high in the air and well before it comes close to B44, A88 runs directly in front of B44 within a yard but is not near him when the ball arrives. B44 catches the punt and is tackled. RULING: No foul. Although A88 penetrates the one-yard region directly in front of the receiver, this is so early in the action that there is no interference with B44’s opportunity to catch the kick.

 

[PushupMan]

Thanks very much for posting, SpotHog. The ref penalized us according to your first paragraph, but paragraph 2 (no foul) was more appropriate in this case. Just all kinds of poor applications of the rules in that game, and most seemed to hurt Louisville - at least from my admittedly biased. viewpoint.

Wake Forest is the conference’s only undefeated team today. Having them at 13-0 and in the playoffs or at 12-1 and in a New Year’s Six game means more money for the conference.

 

[nccardfan]

Thanks very much for posting, SpotHog. The ref penalized us according to your first paragraph, but paragraph 2 (no foul) was more appropriate in this case. Just all kinds of poor applications of the rules in that game, and most seemed to hurt Louisville - at least from my admittedly biased. viewpoint.

Wake Forest is the conference’s only undefeated team today. Having them at 13-0 and in the playoffs or at 12-1 and in a New Year’s Six game means more money for the conference.

Maybe if someone had video evidence of when the Louisville player crossed directly in front of the punt returner in relation to when he caught the ball, it would put this to bed.

 

[PushupMan]

It would be great to see a clip of it again. I don’t have the ability to create a clip or post it, or I would. I remember looking at the replay and seeing what several other people mentioned - the UofL gunner being blocked by a WF player and basically having no choice but to run in front of the WF punt returner. In real time, I also thought that the UofL player ran past the WF return man a second or two before the fair catch - such that the penalty seemed completely uncalled for.

 

[Guardman]

It would be great to see a clip of it again. I don’t have the ability to create a clip or post it, or I would. I remember looking at the replay and seeing what several other people mentioned - the UofL gunner being blocked by a WF player and basically having no choice but to run in front of the WF punt returner. In real time, I also thought that the UofL player ran past the WF return man a second or two before the fair catch - such that the penalty seemed completely uncalled for.

I was there. It was the farthest point from my view. But I saw it pretty well. Louisville's guy ran past the Wake returner. Without touching him. Maybe one second before catch. It was an awful call.

 

[SpotHogCard]

Thanks very much for posting, SpotHog. The ref penalized us according to your first paragraph, but paragraph 2 (no foul) was more appropriate in this case. Just all kinds of poor applications of the rules in that game, and most seemed to hurt Louisville - at least from my admittedly biased. viewpoint.

Wake Forest is the conference’s only undefeated team today. Having them at 13-0 and in the playoffs or at 12-1 and in a New Year’s Six game means more money for the conference.

The thing is, our gunner ran past the left side of the receiver well before the ball got there. In fact, our guy was 3-5 yards past him and had to run back to try to grab the fumble.

 

[2330859]

In fairness to NCCard’s interpretation of the rules, I must be incorrect in my earlier assertion that a 5 yard penalty for incidental interference was an option; that does not appear to have been accurate. However, the video review folks should have reversed the official‘s ruling on the field, when seeing our player was blocked into the vision of the punt returner.

 

[TheRealVille]

Well if anyone thinks WF is going 12 and 1 hasn't watched their games. I don't believe there's any intent here, just ineptitude that naturally benefits the home field team.

Add the Bobby Knight treatment to the officials throughout the game, and the benefit of the doubt favors again the home team. This strategy worked for WF and they knew they needed the extra help to beat the Louisville Cardinals.

 

[LeFors4Ever]

We got hosed. The refs were awful. Everyone here 110% agrees. I don't even need to read the rules to know.

But bottom line, we lost the game. We had a chance to win in the 4th quarter and didn't capitalize. We got held scoreless in the 3rd quarter. But, it's time to move on to Virginia. Reliving these bad calls isn't going to change the outcome of the game on Saturday. Lets move forward to another game and win.

 

[PHCARD]

We got hosed. The refs were awful. Everyone here 110% agrees. I don't even need to read the rules to know.

But bottom line, we lost the game. We had a chance to win in the 4th quarter and didn't capitalize. We got held scoreless in the 3rd quarter. But, it's time to move on to Virginia. Reliving these bad calls isn't going to change the outcome of the game on Saturday. Lets move forward to another game and win.

Word on the street, there’s more to the story on why those refs were there.
Duke refused them and the ref teams were flipped by the ACC.
But yeah, let’s move on.

 

[CardHack]

Maybe I'm a slave to the Age we live...but if the ACC wanted to fix a game to get somebody in the BCS playoffs, they theoretically would put a more competent officiating crew in place to make sure it didn't get screwed up wouldn't they?

...and I say that exclusively listening to the call on the radio and not watching or seeing any of the game outside of a choice number of highlights.

I'm ready to move on...I like some of what I'm seeing with regard to the number of people stepping up to contribute around Malik offensively even with people going down or playing at less than 100%; I think schematically we're close defensively, we just need some people to stay healthy--Gillotte has been a big addition on the edge.

 

[PushupMan]

The thing is, our gunner ran past the left side of the receiver well before the ball got there. In fact, our guy was 3-5 yards past him and had to run back to try to grab the fumble.

We’re definitely in agreement … but I did want to point out that there was no fumble on that play. The WF return man caught the punt cleanly, yet another indication that our gunner’s action had no effect on the return man and that the personal foul call was completely unwarranted.

I remember being exasperated in that moment, thinking back to how often I’ve witnessed defenders crowding the face of our returner who is attempting to fair catch the ball, with no penalty being thrown.

 

[SpotHogCard]

We’re definitely in agreement … but I did want to point out that there was no fumble on that play. The WF return man caught the punt cleanly, yet another indication that our gunner’s action had no effect on the return man and that the personal foul call was completely unwarranted.

I remember being exasperated in that moment, thinking back to how often I’ve witnessed defenders crowding the face of our returner who is attempting to fair catch the ball, with no penalty being thrown.

For some reason I thought he dropped the ball. I'll blame this on multi-tasking and old age...

 

[Smithereen]

We’re definitely in agreement … but I did want to point out that there was no fumble on that play. The WF return man caught the punt cleanly, yet another indication that our gunner’s action had no effect on the return man and that the personal foul call was completely unwarranted.

I remember being exasperated in that moment, thinking back to how often I’ve witnessed defenders crowding the face of our returner who is attempting to fair catch the ball, with no penalty being thrown.

I was saying the same thing, our muff punt was more interference than the one they called on us. That guy was planted right in front of him. Our guy ran past him then two seconds later he caught the ball. Has happened all year , I cringe on every fair catch we have because they let the guy stand right in front of him, hardly has room to put his hands out.