That hardly happens any more. The receiver must clearly and obviously wave his hand. So that reasoning doesn’t, or rarely, applies. The fair catch signal is rarely missed. It might be blatantly ignored on occasion, but that’s another problem.
The rule changes things so that part of calling for a fair catch is the kneel.
Tackling a returner who has waved his arms and not kneeled in a reasonable amount of time would not be a penalty, since that returner has not fully signaled a fair catch.
Tackling a returner who has waved his arms and did not have sufficient time to kneel after the catch would still be a penalty.
I’m not sure why you think it wouldn’t have mattered in the play in the video.
The guy catches the ball and bounces for a moment, then slowly walks, and the defenders turn to walk off the field. They would not have done that if my rule had been in place. He’d either take a knee with them all watching, or they’d tackle him. They would not turn away from him and walk off the field.
You might get some problems with interpretation of “after a reasonable time”. And you’d have to have the kicking-team’s players stop at some moment and wait to see if the receiver is going to kneel or not, thus breaking up their momentum.
I’m ok with that. The only reason they’d stop is if they didn’t know if he’d waved a fair catch, or they assume he has. If they’re sure he has not waved a fair catch, then they’re not going to stop, they’re going to plow into him as soon as they can.
Again, if he actually waved a fair catch, it doesn’t matter if they tackle him. He either takes a knee and the fair catch is completed or he doesn’t and takes a penalty.
If he didn’t wave a fair catch, then it’s easy for them to see that the play is still live because he’s still standing up.
The only thing that my suggested rule changes is that after the rule defenders who are approaching the returner and think that he has, or might have, waved a fair catch will not wander away from him until he’s put a knee to the ground.
The trick play requires exploiting the ambiguity where the defenders think the play is over but it isn’t really. By adding a very obvious signal that the play really is over (a knee), the ambiguity goes away, the trick play goes away, and the adjusted incentives to sometimes tackle the returner if you’re not sure that he’s waved a fair catch are reduced, which reduces injuries.
The reason the new rule fixes things is that it will change the standard way that returners act in a fair catch. Right now, they get close, then stop, then walk away. With the new rule, they will get close, then stop, then wait for the returner to kneel, then the play is 100% for sure over. If instead he stands there and doesn’t kneel, they are going to be on guard because something is not right.
Ok, that’s a lot of text. I think I’ve made a pretty good case for why this will work. If you still think it won’t, I guess we’ll agree to disagree.
Which is irrelevant, because that’s not what happened in the trick play this thread is about. There was no ambiguity. They thought he’d waved. That’s why the trick worked and why your idea won’t. You’re working under a mistaken assumption that doesn’t fit the video.
No it doesn’t. Nothing has changed. You’re really not thinking this through. Yes, taking a knee is a “signal” that it’s over but so what? Again, according to your rules proposal that kneeing is still only a formality because just like now the “real” signal is the same fair catch wave. In your proposal, the returner still has to make the signal and the defenders have to see it. The kneeing is superfluous and the only change is that if the returner forgets or doesn’t do it “fast enough” (which you still haven’t defined though I brought that up already) there’s a penalty.
In a football game where everything happens with lightning speed and a split second hesitation can be the difference between a tackle for loss or a huge gain, nobody is going to do that. How often do you see players hovering around for a while “just in case” on any play after the snap? Never. This won’t ever happen in a real game of football.
We’ll agree to disagree because again, you haven’t thought this through. Watch how punt returns actually work. You’re going to need more than an ambiguous rule about kneeling to change anything.
I don’t think they thought he waved. Watch it again. There’s no wave at all. I think the reason they were fooled is because they just blanked. To me, they’re used to seeing a live runner trying to get away. Without that action, the defenders did not react; they saw someone pretending to have made a fair catch, lackadaisically standing around, even for a second. That’s why they didn’t go for him. But again, there was no wave.
And, to require a kneel in addition to a fair catch wave is actually going to make things worse. If the kneel is even slightly delayed, then there isn’t (yet) a fair catch, and the receiver can be tackled. Now, think of that receiver starting to go down to a knee, but isn’t quite down yet. The defenders, running at high rates of speed, can tackle him because he hasn’t knelt yet.
That is a very exposed and dangerous position to be tackled in. I see knee injuries likely in this scenario.
Maybe this is what you were getting at, Atamasma. Agree, the kneeling is superfluous.
I’d hate to see any rule changes to try and prevent this trickery from happening. I enjoy the trickery (including the fumblerooski) because it shows creativity and a solid, technical knowledge of the rules.
They thought he’d waved when he hadn’t waved and you don’t think that’s an ambiguity?
Again, agree to disagree. I have thought it through, and I’ve attempted to explain my reasoning but we still don’t agree. So be it. It has been an interesting discussion.
I am curious to see what others think. Obviously one of us is wrong, and we both think it’s the other. Looks like Bullitt agrees that I’m wrong and this rule won’t work, but doesn’t 100% agree on the details.
So, anyone else still interested, maybe you can convince either Atamasama or I how to think about it differently.
I don’t understand, where’s the ambiguity? It’s not an ambiguous situation, it’s merely a mistaken assumption on the defenders’ parts.
That is the ambiguity. Mistaken assumptions create ambiguity. The defenders obviously didn’t know his intention or meaning. They thought he intended to make a fair catch and have the play stop. But he did not. But he kind of acted like he did. There’s uncertainty here. A guy catching a football and not running is ambiguous. Resolving the ambiguity requires knowing that he waved for a fair catch, which you might have missed. Or it requires some other way to resolve the uncertainty.
Let’s step away from the “kneel after catch” suggestion for a moment.
Let’s imagine that we have a magic technology where, upon signaling for a fair catch, the returner’s entire uniform turns bright pink.
Would you agree that such a technology would result in more clarity for the defenders? They would be much less likely to be mistaken about whether a fair catch was waved? At the time they arrive at the returner, there would be no ambiguity about whether he signaled for a fair catch, since, well, he’d either be bright pink or he wouldn’t?
If that change makes things more clear, then it has to have been at least somewhat not-clear to start with. There’s some amount of ambiguity.
There is ambiguity in the non-bright-pink situation because it’s possible for people to disagree on the state of reality. There is confusion because it’s easier to be wrong. Did he actually wave a fair catch and I missed it because I was looking down? Did he not wave for it but is acting like he did? There are several different possible states of reality that you can’t obviously and easily tell apart.
The ambiguity is resolved, if I’m the defender running towards the receiver, by plowing him over, tackling him. No ambiguity there! 
Okay, I think I’m beginning to get your point. Yes if I’m the defender then I may have missed that fair catch sign. Okay, maybe this has been yours’ and others’ point all along in this thread. The defender may miss the fair catch sign. Sorry if I missed reading that above. But okay, I do agree that that is a problem! I have a suggested solution (and rule change, per se), but I’ll mention that later.
I do get it. Now. Thanks for your patience and explanation. Sometimes I can be not-quick. :smack:
Agree with your scenario about the pink jersey. My suggestion here is, when a fair catch is called by the returner in the usual hand waving way, that the referees do not blow a whistle while the ball is in the air but the back judge (or whoever is back there with the returner) waves his hands in the air continuously while the ball is still in the air {ADDED: in some fashion that is quite obvious}. Without blowing a whistle.
That ref would have to be near to, and behind, the receiver so that he is in the field of view of the defenders.
With the hand waving returner and the ref doing that, then I think it is much more clear. Minor rule change.
I must admit that I did not read the entire thread when you guys were focusing on a rule change, because I did not think any was needed (because I missed the, uhh, “ambiguity”). Apologies for missing that!
So yes, a rule change would improve things. But what change? I guess that’s been the discussion that I haven’t been following. :shakes head:
That’s why I love the SDMB. We can disagree and be civil. It was an interesting discussion, I agree. 
By the way I was thinking about this today and I was thinking the returner should have some device he could activate that lights up his pads or something. Something a defender can’t miss. Maybe it requires putting the palms of your gloves together to activate so you can’t do it by accident. It’s easy to miss a hardwave or a whistle.
It’s not different from the “pink jersey” idea except I’m not sure how that’d work, technologically…
(Plus it prevents a future pink jersey Color Rush for breast cancer awareness or whatever.)
I, too, like that we do that.
Huzzah for polite and reasoned debate.
I realize that taking a knee is far from a perfect solution. It doesn’t solve all the problems. But it doesn’t require new technology (like light-up/bright pink uniforms). And I think it does help.
Another option would be a signal in the stadium itself. There could be bright “fair catch” lights that light up? The returner wouldn’t have to do anything different; some official who sees him wave could press the button to light them up.
Also a good idea, and better than taking a knee after. Possibly the best idea suggested, since it doesn’t require new technology.