Question about illegal batting of the ball

Don't know for sure - but I think it might be difference between NFL and college rules?

the difference is, the punting team last possessed the ball, and knocking/kicking it outta the endzone results in a safety vs a TD for the opposing team. what happened last night was a team (not in possession of the ball) illegaly batted the ball outta the endzone to give his team an illegal advantage, im not sure what shoulda been ruled on that play, but it seems to me...the lions shoulda still retained possession of the ball, and seattle shoulda been penalized.

jef0071 said:

the difference is, the punting team last possessed the ball, and knocking/kicking it outta the endzone results in a safety vs a TD for the opposing team. what happened last night was a team (not in possession of the ball) illegaly batted the ball outta the endzone to give his team an illegal advantage, im not sure what shoulda been ruled on that play, but it seems to me...the lions shoulda still retained possession of the ball, and seattle shoulda been penalized.

Click to expand...

That is what I heard this morning (about the ruling). The difference is clear now.

I believe the difference in the two situations comes from Seattle being on defense and KJ Wright batting the ball to force a touchback compared to a kicker batting/kicking the ball out of the endzone on a bad snap to avoid the return team recovering it for a touchdwon.

In last night's case, Seattle gets the ball as a turnover. In the other, the return team gets 2 points for a safety.

jef0071 said:

the difference is, the punting team last possessed the ball, and knocking/kicking it outta the endzone results in a safety vs a TD for the opposing team. what happened last night was a team (not in possession of the ball) illegaly batted the ball outta the endzone to give his team an illegal advantage, im not sure what shoulda been ruled on that play, but it seems to me...the lions shoulda still retained possession of the ball, and seattle shoulda been penalized.

Click to expand...

Should have been Detroit's ball at point of fumble, Seattle then assessed penalty for illegally batted ball, half the distance to the goal, (6 inch line), Detroit ball first and goal.

Have to believe it's an adjunct of the Stabler Rule about advancing a fumble - or not.

If the DB had made a plausible attempt at recovery, and the football went out of the field of play - Seattle ball on the 20, EOS.

Incidentally, in future, one hopes that it is referred to as HOFer Stabler Rule.

Another observation: That Kam Chancellor is a dangerously smooth operator.

BamainBoston said:

I'm almost positive that a kicker batting the ball out of the end zone after a blocked punt is a five yard penalty. It's always declined, however, as you'd rather have the two points than make them kick the ball again. There was some question on Alabama's onside kick against Ole Miss whether we illegally batted the ball when we punched it up in the air.

Click to expand...

Yep. A couple of years ago at Arky (the infamous John L Smith SMILE! game), the snap sailed over the punter's head towards the end zone. He ran over and kicked the ball through the endzone. We got the ball at the point where he kicked it.

The key is where the ball is when it is batted. If the penalty occurs in the end zone, the penalty is a safety because it occurred in the end zone (like blocking or any other penalty by the offense in the end zone). So, either way, safety. No risk kicking the ball out of the end zone if you are in the end zone.

If you are not in the end zone and you do this (at least in the NCAA - not sure about the NFL) the penalty is 15 yards from the spot of the foul and loss of down. Yeah - you'd better be in the end zone or the other team gets the ball back on your goal line.

The defense should never commit this penalty as it gives the offense an automatic first down.

BamainBoston said:

I'm almost positive that a kicker batting the ball out of the end zone after a blocked punt is a five yard penalty. It's always declined, however, as you'd rather have the two points than make them kick the ball again. There was some question on Alabama's onside kick against Ole Miss whether we illegally batted the ball when we punched it up in the air.

Click to expand...

Yes, some thought it should have been a penalty because you cannot advance the ball on an onside kick. However, Stewart clearly batted the ball in an effort to keep the Ole Miss player from catching it, which is perfectly legal.

BamainBoston said:

And I have no idea why everyone in the NFL is freaking out about this. How they didn't know you can't bat the ball blows my mind.

Click to expand...

They were aware of the rule. The Back Judge made a homer call.

"I have spoken to the referee [Tony Corrente]. He did not see that part of the play because that is not his area. The back judge [Greg Wilson] felt it was not an intentional act, that it was inadvertent," he added.

Dean Blandino -- Refs incorrectly handled crucial end zone call at end of Lions-Seahawks

ALA2262 said:

They were aware of the rule. The Back Judge made a homer call.

"I have spoken to the referee [Tony Corrente]. He did not see that part of the play because that is not his area. The back judge [Greg Wilson] felt it was not an intentional act, that it was inadvertent," he added.

Dean Blandino -- Refs incorrectly handled crucial end zone call at end of Lions-Seahawks

Click to expand...

How he could try to make a determination as to the intention and not come down on the side of it being intentional is beyond me.

mittman said:

How he could try to make a determination as to the intention and not come down on the side of it being intentional is beyond me.

Click to expand...

That's where I cut the officials some slack. The replay made it clear that it was intentional, but the officials have their heads on a swivel when the game is being played. Who knows how much of that was even in his direct field of vision when the game was being played at real speed.

He made a call and it was the wrong call. Sadly the call is not reviewable.

B1GTide said:

That's where I cut the officials some slack. The replay made it clear that it was intentional, but the officials have their heads on a swivel when the game is being played. Who knows how much of that was even in his direct field of vision when the game was being played at real speed.

He made a call and it was the wrong call. Sadly the call is not reviewable.

Click to expand...

Normally I would agree with you on that. However looking at the video the back judge is literally staring it down the whole way. He had a clear straight view without needing to turn.

Here is a picture showing his full view from the opposite side.

B1GTide said:

That's where I cut the officials some slack. The replay made it clear that it was intentional, but the officials have their heads on a swivel when the game is being played. Who knows how much of that was even in his direct field of vision when the game was being played at real speed.

He made a call and it was the wrong call. Sadly the call is not reviewable.

Click to expand...

I am surprised that it is not since every turnover in the NFL is reviewed. I guess once the fumble occurs what happens next is not reviewable.

Snuffy Smith said:

I am surprised that it is not since every turnover in the NFL is reviewed. I guess once the fumble occurs what happens next is not reviewable.

Click to expand...

What is not reviewable (at least the way I understand it) is whether a penalty occurs or not. When a flag is not thrown there is no flag throwing from a review. So the only reviewable part was whether he crossed the goal line before the punch out.

This I actually agree with and IMO needs to stay.

mittman said:

Normally I would agree with you on that. However looking at the video the back judge is literally staring it down the whole way. He had a clear straight view without needing to turn.

Here is a picture showing his full view from the opposite side.

Click to expand...

Unbelievable! I believe if I was a ref I would be inclined to throw a flag on just about every play. The flag can always be picked up. It can't be thrown after the fact.

As my barber used to say, "I can take some more off, but I can't put it back on".

There's a big difference between 1-3 and 2-2, which is what the Seahawks are. This has got to be killing the other NFC West teams fans.