June 26, 2014: Toronto Argonauts vs. Winnipeg Blue Bombers

[argolio]

So, should a bad snap on a punt that results in no kick, mean a punt attempt, and then the punter is credited with zero or negative yardage which affects his average ?

Good question. Doesn't the punter have to catch the ball and make contact with the ball with his foot for it to be called a punt? On a bad snap I'm assuming the punter is "credited" with a carry for any negative yardage (or the holder in a field goal formation).

Which brings up another question: is a blocked punt counted as a punt for a punter's stats, or does the ball have to cross the line of scrimmage?

[argolio]

I have to disagree with you, Argolio. As Daniels notes, the penalties were legitimate infractions regardless of whether they were accepted or not. If an OT were to take 10 holding penalties during a game but each time it was declined because the defence stopped the offence anyway, I don't think the offensive team or the player in particular should get off scot-free. So 10 penalties for zero yards would make sense to me as the stat in that (extreme) example.

Players would not get off scot-free internally if ten holding penalties were declined as those calls would definitely come up during film sessions later in the week, but we're talking about how to account for penalties statistically.

Though if a team had ten holding penalties declined, that would mean they turned the ball over a lot and/or they weren't able to convert a bunch of second and long situations and then punted on third down. Declined holding penalties would probably be the least of that team's problems.

[paulwoods13]

I think the league's approach makes sense, and I bet it is done this way at all senior levels of football (NFL, college). If someone commits an infraction and is caught, it should be recorded regardless of whether penalty yardage is applied.

With respect to the punt-that-wasn't question, I believe it would be considered a rushing attempt if the punter receives the snap and is tackled. That would be the correct way to credit it, in my view, as it's really no different than a failed third-down offensive play. If there is a bad snap that the punter can't receive and it's recovered by the defence, it's considered a fumble. In neither of those cases is the kicker credited with a punt.

[AngeloV]

With respect to the punt-that-wasn't question, I believe it would be considered a rushing attempt if the punter receives the snap and is tackled. That would be the correct way to credit it, in my view, as it's really no different than a failed third-down offensive play.

I have to disagree on this. I think it would be treated similar to a QB sack, where there would be a team loss in terms of yardage, but not a rushing attempt.

[paulwoods13]

I have to disagree on this. I think it would be treated similar to a QB sack, where there would be a team loss in terms of yardage, but not a rushing attempt.

Yeah, that is more likely now that I think about it. I believe the decision on whether or not to credit a rushing attempt is somewhat subjective. If a QB is scrambling and gets tackled behind the line of scrimmage, sometimes the play gets credited as a sack and sometimes as a rush, depending on the scorer's view of whether or not he was still trying to pass or had abandoned the pass and was trying to gain yards on the ground.

[argolio]

I think the league's approach makes sense, and I bet it is done this way at all senior levels of football (NFL, college). If someone commits an infraction and is caught, it should be recorded regardless of whether penalty yardage is applied.

Google told me the NFL doesn't count declined penalties, which is why I (wrongly) assumed the CFL did the same. Not sure what the CIS and NCAA do.

[Rich]

Google told me the NFL doesn't count declined penalties, which is why I (wrongly) assumed the CFL did the same. Not sure what the CIS and NCAA do.

Brilliant recovery, argolio! Whew!