Officially Speaking: Here's the kicker ...
Editor's Note: Officially Speaking with Steve Hall is a feature that allows readers to ask questions about high school football rules, and will run weekly throughout the season. Hall has been a New Hampshire high school official since 1989 and has officiated more than 200 regular-season varsity games in all five divisions. He has also officiated 10 championship games and more than 25 playoff games. Hall, who is a member of the New Hampshire Football Officials' Association Board of Directors, has been the NHFOA rules interpreter for the last seven years. Questions for Steve can be sent to rbrown@nhfootballreport.com. Questions may be edited for clarity.
Question: Can you please explain the difference between running into the kicker and roughing the kicker? Not the penalty yardage, but what makes an official call one penalty instead of the other?
P.S., Bow
Answer: Running into the kicker (or holder) is contact with the kicker that displaces the kicker from his location. Roughing the kicker (or holder) is contact that is harder than just displacing the kicker. Roughing frequently involves knocking the kicker to the ground.
Running into and roughing the kicker are calls made exclusively by the referee. I find that these calls (along with roughing the passer) are the most difficult calls to decide on. Running into or roughing the kicker is not called when: a) contact is unavoidable because it isn't reasonably certain that a kick will be made; b) the defense touches the kick near the kicker and contact is thereafter unavoidable; c) contact is slight and is partially caused by movement of the kicker; or d) contact is caused by a kicking team member blocking his opponent into the kicker.
As you can see from the criteria above, there is no clear-cut standard for determining whether a foul for running into or roughing the kicker has occurred, nor is it completely clear as to the difference between running into and roughing. As a result, no two referees will call it the same way because it's largely a matter of judgment as to whether a foul has occurred and, if so, whether it's roughing or just running into the kicker. In games that I have worked, it seems that every time there is any contact with the kicker, the kicker will take a dive, hoping to draw a flag. I find it relatively easy to determine whether the kicker has taken a dive, and I will not call a foul if I decide that there was only slight contact and the kicker has intentionally thrown himself to the ground.
Running into the kicker is a 5-yard penalty from the spot of the snap. Roughing the kicker is a 15-yard penalty from the spot of the snap, plus an automatic first down. You can quickly tell the difference when the referee
gives his signal. Roughing the kicker will be preceded by the personal foul signal, while running into the kicker will only be the "leg kick" signal.
Madden too much. Thanks.
Jim and Dan, Nashua
Answer: If your brother has been listening to John Madden for information about the rules, he runs the risk of being seriously misled. However, you may still lose the argument, depending on what the issue is. Under high
school (and NCAA) rules, any time a runner contacts the ground with any part of his body other than a hand or foot, the ball becomes dead. Therefore, the ground cannot cause a fumble, because the ball is dead prior
to possession being lost. Under NFL rules, however, there is the concept that the runner must be downed by contact.If a runner falls to the ground without an opponent causing him to fall, the ball remains live and the
runner can get up and continue running. The ground can indeed cause a fumble in that situation if contact with the ground caused the runner to lose possession of the ball. Since I have a difficult time picturing an inanimate object (the ground) "causing" something to occur, I think the more correct characterization is that a player's contact with the ground can cause him to fumble under NFL rules if the player falls to the ground absent any contact from an opponent.
Can you now tell us who won the argument?
Question: Do you know if there is a limit on the number of "innings" that can be played in overtime, or if the rules change at any point? I know in college a team has to go for two at a certain point. Safety becomes an issue after four quarters and a long OT.
T.T., Dover
Answer: NFHS rules state that each state association may adopt its own rules for resolving tied games. The rule book provides a suggested method for resolving tied games where each team is given the ball at its
opponent's 10-yard line under a first-and- goal-to-go situation. That method has been adopted by the NHIAA for high school games in New Hampshire. There is no limit to the number of innings that can be played under that
method, nor is there any requirement for a team to attempt a 2-point try if they score a touchdown during overtime.
Check the archives for more Officially Speaking features with Steve Hall.
