Ethan Kilmer

[redsbengalsbucks]

Can anyone explain to me why that was not a TD. I was under the impression that a punt after being touched by the recieving team was a live ball.

I still feel ripped off about that call.

Ethan Kilmer has put to bed the Worst draft ever complaints, he along with Peko, JJ and Whitworth look like solid contributors for years to come.

[Tasher]

That was dead as soon as Cincinnati possessed it under the muffed punt rule.

1. The distinction between a fumble and a muff should be kept in mind in considering rules about fumbles. A fumble is the loss of player possession of the ball. A muff is the touching of a loose ball by a player in an unsuccessful attempt to obtain possession.

http://www.nfl.com/fans/rules/fumble

I thought the same thing and went to the kitchen for a snack, came back and the Bengals offense was on teh field running plays, I was like, WTF? What happened to the TD?

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

That was dead as soon as Cincinnati possessed it under the muffed punt rule.

1. The distinction between a fumble and a muff should be kept in mind in considering rules about fumbles. A fumble is the loss of player possession of the ball. A muff is the touching of a loose ball by a player in an unsuccessful attempt to obtain possession.

http://www.nfl.com/fans/rules/fumble

I thought the same thing and went to the kitchen for a snack, came back and the Bengals offense was on teh field running plays, I was like, WTF? What happened to the TD?

While I do understand the distinction, could anyone explain to me the *reason* the rule exists? That's always been on my short list of idiotic rules.

[Vol_Bengal]

Can anyone explain to me why that was not a TD. I was under the impression that a punt after being touched by the recieving team was a live ball.

I still feel ripped off about that call.

Ethan Kilmer has put to bed the Worst draft ever complaints, he along with Peko, JJ and Whitworth look like solid contributors for years to come.

On a muffed punt (in the process of catching it) if the defense recovers it, the play is dead and they take possession at that spot. If it is in the end-zone then touchdown but outside the end-zone as soon as possession is achieved it is dead. Now, if the returner catches it and takes possession (similar to the rule of a completed pass) then drops it the play goes from a muffed punt to a fumble - at that point it is allowed to be advanced just like any other play during the game.

[Tasher]

Ah.

No, no idea.

Presumably because the receiving team really has no ability to defend against the kicking team recovering and scoring.

so the situation you could create is, kick the ball on any down, bounce it off a defender, then advance it.

just a guess...

[derekshank]

The reason for the rule is the same as the onside kick rule. Once the kicking team gets possession, they cannot advance it.

I'm not sure why the NFL views a muffed punt and a muffed punt as the same thing (since there is no way to intentionally get a guy to muff it)... but that is the rule.

[Bengalhead]

That was dead as soon as Cincinnati possessed it under the muffed punt rule.

1. The distinction between a fumble and a muff should be kept in mind in considering rules about fumbles. A fumble is the loss of player possession of the ball. A muff is the touching of a loose ball by a player in an unsuccessful attempt to obtain possession.

http://www.nfl.com/fans/rules/fumble

I thought the same thing and went to the kitchen for a snack, came back and the Bengals offense was on teh field running plays, I was like, WTF? What happened to the TD?

While I do understand the distinction, could anyone explain to me the *reason* the rule exists? That's always been on my short list of idiotic rules.

I agree with you 100% What a stupid rule that is.

[AMC]

IMO, if the receiving team touches the ball AT ALL and it is recovered by the kicking team it should be able to be advanced. Sometimes I think the NFL is being run by a pack of deranged sadists sent to this earth to torture intelligent fans, but......

Isn't Marvin on the competition committee?????

Need that rule looked at Marv.....

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

The reason for the rule is the same as the onside kick rule. Once the kicking team gets possession, they cannot advance it.

I'm not sure why the NFL views a muffed punt and a muffed punt as the same thing (since there is no way to intentionally get a guy to muff it)... but that is the rule.

OK, amend the question: Why can one not advance a muff or onsides kick once taking possession?

The only explanation I've heard is that on 3rd and long the QB might punt the ball into a defender with the intention of then picking it up and running it, but that seems quite strange and even then the muff rule as implemented would give them a free set of downs. So that can't be it.

There has to be a reason, and I imagine its a holdover from a day back in the 20s when football usually involved your foot a bit more.

[derekshank]

With Onside kicks... it is to keep from penalizing a team for winning late in the game. If you can kick an onside kick, and the ball manages to get past the hands team, and a person on the kicking team can get to the ball... there are usually not many players between him and the endzone.

While this rule might seem stupid to you... the year before it was instituted, there were several occasions where an onside kick was returned for a TD, and the way the rules were playing out, it was because the rules were giving an advantage to the kicking team. This advantage was taken away, because a rule should never give the advantage to a team that needs to resort to desperation attempts late in the game.

As for the punt... I'm not sure why the same rule applies... except that in the same way, there will be no one behind the play once a player on the kicking team picks the ball up. But with a muffed punt, we're talking about a mistake by a player... not a rule that gives the kicking team an advantage. I'm not sure why there is no distinction between onside kicks and punts in this way... but I certainly understand the onside kick recovery rule.

[redsbengalsbucks]

With Onside kicks... it is to keep from penalizing a team for winning late in the game. If you can kick an onside kick, and the ball manages to get past the hands team, and a person on the kicking team can get to the ball... there are usually not many players between him and the endzone.

While this rule might seem stupid to you... the year before it was instituted, there were several occasions where an onside kick was returned for a TD, and the way the rules were playing out, it was because the rules were giving an advantage to the kicking team. This advantage was taken away, because a rule should never give the advantage to a team that needs to resort to desperation attempts late in the game.

As for the punt... I'm not sure why the same rule applies... except that in the same way, there will be no one behind the play once a player on the kicking team picks the ball up. But with a muffed punt, we're talking about a mistake by a player... not a rule that gives the kicking team an advantage. I'm not sure why there is no distinction between onside kicks and punts in this way... but I certainly understand the onside kick recovery rule.

Very well put Thank you

[redsfan2]

The reason for the rule is the same as the onside kick rule. Once the kicking team gets possession, they cannot advance it.

I'm not sure why the NFL views a muffed punt and a muffed punt as the same thing (since there is no way to intentionally get a guy to muff it)... but that is the rule.

OK, amend the question: Why can one not advance a muff or onsides kick once taking possession?

The only explanation I've heard is that on 3rd and long the QB might punt the ball into a defender with the intention of then picking it up and running it, but that seems quite strange and even then the muff rule as implemented would give them a free set of downs. So that can't be it.

There has to be a reason, and I imagine its a holdover from a day back in the 20s when football usually involved your foot a bit more.

The rule prior to this had been that once the ball came out ... got dropped or whatever it was dead at the spot that the opposing team recovered and had posession. What a lot of teams ... most notably the Raiders were doing was making grabs at the ball and pusing it closer to the endzone. Once IN the endzone they would suddenly figure out how to finally get posession of it .... and of course score the TD.

Kinda like the infield fly rule in baseball to avoid and almost automatic double play.

[Grizz08]

simply the worst rule in nfl history.

[derekshank]

simply the worst rule in nfl history.

No... that would be the tuck rule.

[Kazkal]

Or the you can't touch the QB rule.

[GapControl]

derekshanks has the crust of the reason for the rule in his post. also, if anyone can remember seeing footage of pre 1960s football, quarterbacks used to do a lot of the punting... strange things now were more common then, such as a quarterback punting the ball on 3rd down suddenly, it bouncing around on the field then eventually being picked up and progressed as if it were a designed play. i think the term "backyard football" applies here. this rule concerning a muffed punt probably evolves alongside the NFL`s current era of specialization. as the years have passed, each position on the field has become more and more specialized therefore rules need to be more specific in certain situations. making rules in this manner allows for the teams to have an even playing field at all times. even when it seems quite nonsensical. the NFL was not always as ordered and specialized as today.

[HoosierCat]

As for the punt... I'm not sure why the same rule applies... except that in the same way, there will be no one behind the play once a player on the kicking team picks the ball up. But with a muffed punt, we're talking about a mistake by a player... not a rule that gives the kicking team an advantage.

Curnutte had a brief post about this on his blog:

The "muffed' punt rule

With 4:20 left in the game Thursday night, the Bengals' Ethan Kilmer recovered a "muffed" punt by Baltimore's Corey Ivy at the 34-yard line. Kilmer ran in from the 35, but the ball was awarded to Cincinnati at the 35.

Here's the rule:

"The definition of a muff is as follows: touching of the ball prior to possessing the ball. The act of muffing the ball is not considered possession. In order to advance the ball, which the kicking team recovers, it has to be possessed by the receiving team first. The kicking team can also recover a muff, but it cannot be advanced. The people who wrote the rules of the game thought it was unfair to allow the kickers to recover a ball and advance it, unless the receiving team possessed it first."

[membengal]

By the way, Kilmer has vaulted into my top five favorite Bengals players. Easily. If they made a Kilmer jersey, I would be all over that.

f**kin' fantastic draft pick. Sky seems to be the limit for his NFL career...at the least a Tasker-like demon on special teams, and may have a real future at safety. Phenomenal.

[Kirkendall]

Actually the rule was implemented as a point of fairness. The people that wrote the rule didn't feel it was fair that the receiving team never had possession (a muff is different in that regard to fumble) and the recovering team could advance it. It has nothing to do with scoring easy. This rule exists in all levels of football so it's universally accepted.

[Stripes]

By the way, Kilmer has vaulted into my top five favorite Bengals players. Easily. If they made a Kilmer jersey, I would be all over that.

f**kin' fantastic draft pick. Sky seems to be the limit for his NFL career...at the least a Tasker-like demon on special teams, and may have a real future at safety. Phenomenal.

Agreed. I don't like to give any rookie that much credit, but with his performance this season, Kilmer is probably my favorite Bengal already.

[rwalling]

On a barely related note, Kilmer looks really good return INTs and fumbles. I wonder out loud if he could be developed into a stud punt returner in the offseason. His speed and teams experience would seem to make him a natural.

[skyline]

Man, is Ethan really showing his worth or what? He was right there for the muffed punt on Monday night, and seems to be all over the place on special teams.

[Stripes]

Man, is Ethan really showing his worth or what? He was right there for the muffed punt on Monday night, and seems to be all over the place on special teams.

Yeah, I credit that muff to Kilmer as much as the punt returner himself. He was bearing down on him so fast, and caused that slight hesitation between a fair catch and a return. If there is one Bengal that didn't make the Pro Bowl whom I think should have, it's Kilmer as a special teamer.