NFL Kicking Rules

Yeah as in, if no rouge were in play, there would be less incentive to attempt to return it or worse, as it is in the NFL, if the ball is not caught in the air, the play is dead immediately upon missing the field goal. In Canada, the ball sails past the goal posts and we’re still playing.

When is the last time you saw a single given up on a kickoff in the CFL the way touchbacks are handled in the NFL?

Think of kicking in a hierachy:

Kicking the ball:
- punting the ball without the ball hitting the ground
- kicking it from the ground or tee as in a field goal

The point is, it's all kicking and the rule for the rouge doesn't distinguish the subtype.

Just means I’m old and have been watching for a while, that’s all. :wink:

[quote="stevehvh... in American ball the goal line is a sort of "finish line", while in Canadian football it is the "home" of the defending team's "territory", to be defended at the penalty of the loss of a point.
[/quote]
Very well put! I like that. A lot. Haven't heard that before.

Yes, haven't heard that either, nicely put steve. And I'm not surprised Captain that you knew all this about the kicking.

But man, you can see what some people have a hard time with football, it can be a real learning curve for those that are more inclined to be drawn to more simplistic sports like hockey and soccer, not that I don't like hockey I do but it is more simplistic than football I think.

But keep in mind, Earl, that we're following TWO football leagues with some differences in rules.

How about the one when an offensive player fumbles the ball and it goes out through the defence's end zone?

Remember when Dressler did that at IWS when Saskatchewan was here two years ago?

Are there differences between the two leagues with this situation?

Yes, in the NFL it’s a touchback and the defending team gets possession of the ball on their own 20. I don’t get that rule. The defense doesn’t even have to touch the ball before it goes out of bounds.

I’m trying to remember the CFL rule. Is it the same as any other fumble elsewhere on the field? The team that last touches the ball gets possession? In the Dressler case, he touched it last so Sask. retained possession at the point of last contact, which was the one yard line in this case.

Am I remembering corrrectly? Not sure.

Me too!

Excellent summary of the evolution of the game and its relationship to the rouge. I agree, it has declined, for the reasons you mentioned. And I agree fully about its continued value today.

[quote author=“CaptainKirk”]

Very well put! I like that. A lot. Haven’t heard that before.

Thanks. I agree, it’s a good concept. No credit to me though. I heard it first a number of years ago on this site. It was Zuger9 who said it. A great and sorely missed member here.

I don’t watch a lot of NFL, so that’s the first time I’ve heard that word used.

I know you can dive on a fumble. Tell me - can you dive on a muff?

You are remembering correctly.

I was actually about to bring up this rules difference as well.

I do get the NFL rule more than the CFL one. In the NFL, you don’t reward the team for losing the ball. If you lose the ball and it goes out the back of the endzone, it’s the same rules as a punt/ kick off. When a team kicks the ball to you, hence releasing possesion of the football and it goes out of your endzone without you touching it, you still get the ball.

In the CFL, you fumble the ball through or out of the endzone you still get the ball. Why? You are giving away possession and it should be, like the nfl, have the rules of punts and kickoffs. If it goes through the endzone, you get the ball at the 35. The team fumbling should not get the ball back. In the CFL you get rewarded for fumbling and no one touching it.

The argument is the same as a ball going out of bounds. In the CFL you just have to be the last one to touch it. In the NFL you have to have control of the ball before it or you go out of bounds.

The CFL and NFL have different sets of rules. I do appreciate both sets of rules and in reality, would not change anything in either. Each league has their own identity and rules. That’s what makes them so different. That’s why we follow both.

Then why isn’t a fumble out of bounds via the sideline treated the same a punt out of bounds by the sideline? It’s a contradiction. It’s not a kick. It’s a fumble.

The argument is the same as a ball going out of bounds.
But it's not. If it goes out of bounds on the sidleine, the team that last had possession retains possession.

But if it goes out through the endzone, the possession changes? Why? The defense did not get posssession of the ball.

That’s what I don’t get about the NFL rule. Two very drastically different results for the same event only because one is the endzone and the other the sideline.

The CFL, it’s not. A fumble out of bounds is a fumble out of bounds.

{shrug) Oh well.

The reason why there is a difference between the sidelines and the endzone is that you can still advance the ball if the ball goes out of bounds. The endzone is where you cannot proceed anymore. I see a huge difference between the sidelines and the endzone. Like I said before, the rules for a fumble into the endzone seem like punt/kick rules. I have no issue with either rules but I think the NFLs make more sense.

Not quite true. if the ball is fumbled and goes into the endzone it’s still live. The defensive team can pick it up and run with it, so you can proceed with the play.

But if the the ball gores out of bounds, it is not spotted where it goes out. It is spotted where it was last possessed.

So, any fumble out the back of the endzone would have to happen BEFORE entering the endzone. ( You can’t fumble after crossing the goal line. That’s a touchdown and the play is instantly dead)

(I love these kinds of discussions)

My issue with the CFL rule vis a vis the Dressler fumble is with the notion that when a defender dislodges the ball by making contact with it, that contact is not considered a "touch" for the purpose of establishing possession. If the offensive player drops the ball by himself or it flies out because someone pulled his arm away, fine require the defense to touch it to gain possession. But where the fumble is forced by the defender's contact with the ball itself, I don't think a second touch should be required.

It’s interesting though that it seems the kickers are mad if they get a single point for it going in the end zone instead of the field position. I get that, field position can result in field goals or even td’s that are more than a single point of course. That being said, if a kicker misses an extra point on convert, the announcers are all saying that could be a critical point in the outcome of the game. I’m not that smart but a point is a point and while it wasn’t the objective of the punter to get the point, that point in my mind could be as critical as the point on a convert, it’s all a point afterall. Maybe I’m missing something here? Maybe the rouge should be two points? :?

In fact, didn’t McCallum have one of those “unintended” punt singles against us in the Eastern semi-final this past year? If the Cats had failed on the late 2-point convert, people likely would have been talking more about that point.

I can't remember safety, maybe someone can help here.