Safety vs. Touchback

PhDeac said:

We recovered the fumble in the end zone. It would have been BS if the ball had just gone out.

As far as the muff, it's crazy that there is a situation and spot on the field where it doesn't matter who recovers a live ball.

Click to expand...

A muff =/= a fumble. Muff does not cause the ball to be possessed. Or live. A fumble requires the ball to first be possessed. A live ball can be advanced by either team. A muffed ball is still a punted ball (not live) and yet can be possessed but not advanced by the punting team.

A muffed ball crossing the end zone, since neither live nor possessed (still a kicked ball) is a touchback.

Weird status, a muffed ball.

So a muffed punt is different from a punt that hits the ground and then bounces into the leg of a player on the receiving team? At that point the ball, if in the field of play, becomes a live ball and recoverable by the kicking team.

No different. Not live. Yes, recoverable by kicking team but not advanceable.

A live ball can be not merely recovered but advanced by either team.

So if we had recovered in the end zone it would have been a touchBACK not a touchDOWN - glad they recovered then since there would have been a riot if we didn't get 6 with nobody in the stands knowing the rule. We could have looked as dumb as App's fans did when they thought they were getting another FG try against us since we ran onto field after the block (well...maybe not that dumb, but still wouldn't have looked good)

PhDeac said:

We recovered the fumble in the end zone. It would have been BS if the ball had just gone out.

As far as the muff, it's crazy that there is a situation and spot on the field where it doesn't matter who recovers a live ball.

Click to expand...

Technically there's not a place on the field where you can't recover a live ball. A punted ball is dead the moment it passes over the plane of the goal line (doesn't even have to touch the ground in the endzone in college).

Wait a minute. So if we recovered the ball in the endzone, it would not have been a touchdown, and would have still been a touchback??? That's even more idiotic than I thought. Bad plays should not be rewarded in football. This rule rewards an extremely bad play.

Right, technically, the touched or muffed punt (never possessed nor live but only recoverable and not advanceable by the kicking team) is NOT recoverable once it crosses the goal line.

And yes the fans would have been pissed not understanding this fascinating rule. Me included.

Nice to learn something!

Thx Turd. I’ve tried to look it all up after your initial posts...seems you are on the money.

NjDeac77 said:

So if we had recovered in the end zone it would have been a touchBACK not a touchDOWN - glad they recovered then since there would have been a riot if we didn't get 6 with nobody in the stands knowing the rule. We could have looked as dumb as App's fans did when they thought they were getting another FG try against us since we ran onto field after the block (well...maybe not that dumb, but still wouldn't have looked good)

Click to expand...

I honestly did not know this rule after 30 years of watching football. Probably the stupidest football rule I have ever heard of. If we recover on the 1 it is first and goal for the Deacs. If we recover in the end zone then state gets the ball on the 20 yard line? That is completely asinine.

Either a muffed punt is a fumble or it isn't. I don't understand why there is a special rule for that kind of screwup.

It isn’t a fumble. And it’s not recoverable in the end zone.

Weird status has that touched/muffed but not possessed ball after being punted (if the touch occurs after the ball crossing the neutral zone).

Turd Ferguson said:

Technically there's not a place on the field where you can't recover a live ball. A punted ball is dead the moment it passes over the plane of the goal line (doesn't even have to touch the ground in the endzone in college).

Click to expand...

At Air Force Academy, 1998

Adrian Duncan of WF attempts to catch a punt over his shoulder

Ball hits his shoulder pad and bounces into end zone

Air Force recovers in end zone

Touchdown AFA

perhaps they have changed the definition of "muff" vs. "catch" since then, but he never had possession

and if they have changed the rule, it's a stupid change; AFA deserved that touchdown

it's a dumb rule

thatguy2016 said:

At Air Force Academy, 1998

Adrian Duncan of WF attempts to catch a punt over his shoulder

Ball hits his shoulder pad and bounces into end zone

Air Force recovers in end zone

Touchdown AFA

perhaps they have changed the definition of "muff" vs. "catch" since then, but he never had possession

and if they have changed the rule, it's a stupid change; AFA deserved that touchdown

Click to expand...

Sounds like they just blew it.

I'm surprised so many people think it's a dumb rule. It's just a rule like any other. So if the punter gets the punt blocked but it doesn't pass scrimmage the kicking team can pick it up and advance it and get a first down. Is this a dumb rule because it rewards the punting team for getting a punt blocked? It's just the rule. Either team can advance a kicked ball behind scrimmage. The kicking team can not advance a ball beyond scrimmage. A kick in the endzone is a touchback. It just is. Get first downs and don't punt. Recover muffed punts.

It's funny so many people didn't know this was a rule or why.

Was that the 42-0 Air Force win in the opener when Wake entered ranked 25th in some poll and just got totally dominated?

Wait, if we recovered that muffed punt it wouldn't be a touchdown for Wake? That can't be right can it?

I know you can't advance a muff, but if the punt returner touches it and it bounces into the end zone and the opposing team recovers it's a TD correct? As in if a muff bounces into the end zone, it is not dead as soon as it crosses into the end zone is it?

Yes. That would be it.

Wakeforest22890 said:

Wait, if we recovered that muffed punt it wouldn't be a touchdown for Wake? That can't be right can it?

I know you can't advance a muff, but if the punt returner touches it and it bounces into the end zone and the opposing team recovers it's a TD correct? As in if a muff bounces into the end zone, it is not dead as soon as it crosses into the end zone is it?

Click to expand...

Would have been a touchback for state. Facepalm

Turd Ferguson said:

Sounds like they just blew it.

I'm surprised so many people think it's a dumb rule. It's just a rule like any other. So if the punter gets the punt blocked but it doesn't pass scrimmage the kicking team can pick it up and advance it and get a first down. Is this a dumb rule because it rewards the punting team for getting a punt blocked? It's just the rule. Either team can advance a kicked ball behind scrimmage. The kicking team can not advance a ball beyond scrimmage. A kick in the endzone is a touchback. It just is. Get first downs and don't punt. Recover muffed punts.

It's funny so many people didn't know this was a rule or why.

Click to expand...

In your example, it becomes a live ball, which is exactly what we are advocating for in this case. If the punt gets blocked in their own end zone and the punting team recovers, it's a safety, not a touchback. If a punt returner muffs a punt, a live-ball turnover opportunity should be created with the onus on the receiving team to prevent the ball from going into their own end zone, either for a TD or safety. A touchback shouldn't be an option.

When rules defy common sense for the fast majority of fans, experts, etc., and wouldn't clearly hurt the game, they should probably be changed. It's as simple as that.

thatguy2016 said:

At Air Force Academy, 1998

Adrian Duncan of WF attempts to catch a punt over his shoulder

Ball hits his shoulder pad and bounces into end zone

Air Force recovers in end zone

Touchdown AFA

perhaps they have changed the definition of "muff" vs. "catch" since then, but he never had possession

and if they have changed the rule, it's a stupid change; AFA deserved that touchdown

Click to expand...

I think technically they ruled it a fumble although I don't think that was the right call, it was clearly a muff. Maybe the official wasn't paying close attention because he assumed no one would be dumb enough to try to catch that punt.

tigerswood said:

In your example, it becomes a live ball, which is exactly what we are advocating for in this case. If the punt gets blocked in their own end zone and the punting team recovers, it's a safety, not a touchback. If a punt returner muffs a punt, a live-ball turnover opportunity should be created with the onus on the receiving team to prevent the ball from going into their own end zone, either for a TD or safety. A touchback shouldn't be an option.

When rules defy common sense for the fast majority of fans, experts, etc., and wouldn't clearly hurt the game, they should probably be changed. It's as simple as that.

Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying. (Except the ball is technically live in all situations including kicks.) I guess when they wrote the rules they figured giving a team the opportunity to kick the ball 40 yards downfield and change field position after not advancing the ball on offense was a pretty generous opportunity in itself. And since you are basically shifting possession to the other side on a punt (because your offense didn't get a first down) they figured the onus didn't need to be on anyone. If the receiver muffs it then recover it. The don't advance rule isn't even what most people are complaining about. They don't like the touchback in the endzone deal. Which once again is just a football rule. If the kicking team touches the punt the receiving team pretty much has a free shot to advance without being subject to turnover. Should they get rid of that? I bet most fans don't understand that rule either. It seems like the rules view a punt as a change of possession and protects (rewards) the receiving team for the defense getting off the field. Guess it's just a matter of perspective.

Overall I'm not an advocate of changing rules because of fans. Fans are by and large idiots.

I am an advocate of muffed punts inside the 20 yard line taking on a rule similar to that of late 4th qtr fumble rules: A muffed punt should never result in positive yardage automatically, so that a muff wouldn't provide positive yardage unless the team recovers a forward muffed punt OR the team recovers a backwards muffed punt & advances it. Basically, if a punt is muffed and goes into the end zone, it would be returned to the spot of the muff, not to the 20 yard line.