Quote:
Originally posted by JRutledge
Quote:
Originally posted by Ed Hickland
I hope everyone is in agreement, a double foul is treated as in the past, PSK or not.
No, we are not all in agreement. For one I have already stated what is on the NF Powerpoint presentation that makes it clear that R can decline K's penalties and keep the ball.
|
So much for agreement. There was some confusion on double fouls early on and now since the interpreters met in July, the confusion has ended. Forget the old PowerPoint. Double foul it is according to NFHS Rules.
Quote:
Originally posted by Ed Hickland
Last winter when the revision first came out, I personally asked Jerry Diehl about possession and double fouls and his reply was "nothing changes."
The book does support it because there are no changes to possession or double fouls references.
I have to disagree with that statement. If you read on the top of page 73, where the Comments on the Rules Revisions are located. They use the "clean hands" reference there as well and give a greater understanding of what the intent of PSK is in the first place. My question is then why is "clean hands" used if their intent was to make fouls by K and R during many of these situations a double foul? The term "clean hands" is used to make sure we do not cancel a play out and rule a double foul on a change of possession play. That is the only place the term is used. If this kind of play is not used for "clean hand," then what kind of play are they referring to?
|
|
The statement is taken out of context. R must have "clean hands" at the time the ball crosses the expanded neutral zone in order to retain possession..."the rule change does not change the concept that the receiving team has to get the ball with clean hands, but rather, that they have to have clean hands until the ball crosses the expanded neutral zone."
Example: R53 a linebacker 4 yards from the line of scrimmage charges toward the line and clips K78 who was on the line of scrimmage at the snap. All this occurs before the kicker gets the snap off. After the ball crosses the ENZ, R20 blocks K34 in the back beyond the ENZ.
You have a PSK and a non-PSK foul. If K chooses to accept the non-PSK foul -- I would not even give them a choice -- which occurred before the ball crossed the ENZ. K would get to retain possession because when the ball crossed the ENZ R's did not have "clean hands."