Convert Rule Question

A team sets up for the 32 yd. one point convert. The holder fumbles the snap, the ball bounces around, but he finally picks it up and throws to an eligible receiver who crosses the goal line.

Would it be 2 points?

Yes it is 2 points.

Also , if the fumble is recovered by the the other team and they run it back, they would get the 2 points.

Works both ways.

Same rules we had before....just the point of the kick was moved back.

Thanks for the responses.

I had a thought during Fridays game. Team lines up for the convert, kick is good but the they receive a penalty (holding, procedure it doesn't matter what) and the ball is moved back 10 yards and they replay the convert.

Question, can the offense now decide to try for two and have the penalty applied from the 3?

While we're playing what if...

Can you line up for a two point convert, fake a pass, and then kick it through?

From page 31 of the rule book.

".......Note: When a convert is re-tried due to a penalty, a team that initially
elected to attempt a 2 point convert from the 3 yard line cannot change
their election to now attempt a 1 point convert on the re-try. They must
continue to attempt a 2 point convert. If the convert was initially
scrimmaged from the 25 yard line, on the re-try a team may attempt either a
field goal to score 1 point or pass or run the ball into goal to score 2 points
just as they could have on the original attempt from the 25 yard line....."

Yea, I never liked the new convert rules. I don't like that the 2 different types are scrimmaged from different yard lines. It's messy and not well thought out, like some new radical idea was rammed through in a panic without really taking into account all the ramafications.

Kinda like the US expansion was rammed through in a panic with no thought behind it whatsoever.

Disagree. The old 1 point was all but automatic. How many actually watched the convert or just used the extra time for bathroom/beer/food break. Not automatic any more and moving the 2 point to the 3 means the decision to go for 1 is no longer automatic yet teams still have to work for that 2.

If anything was a new radical idea (that) was rammed through in a panic without really taking into account all the ramifications it was the illegal contact on a receiver rule and the objectionable conduct for the flag signal.

Sure it was automatic. I am not against changing the convert rule, just against how they did it.

For instance: I'd much rather just get rid of the kick for 1 and force teams to scrimmage from the 3 or 5 for their point, or from the 8 or 10 for 2.

Interesting idea. In rugby they have to kick from where the try was scored. You ground it by the sideline it's a tough kick. Your idea is in that spirit, making a team have to work for the extra point.