Quote:
Originally posted by cmathews
I don't disagree with what you are saying piggskin, as a matter of fact your position is pretty defensible..but consider this..Why does the clock start on the snap when A recovers a punt that was touched first by B...Here is my logic to it, there has been a change of possesion, when A kicked it they gave up possesion then got it back via a muff or fumble that they recovered....if you agree with that logic then the fumbled interception is not that much different?? any thoughts...anyone??
|
K does not really give up possession in such a play. They may intend to, but in reality they are in possession all along. While it has probably never happened in modern football, A could legally kick the ball with the intent of not giving up possession. Obviously it's risky and is probably not going to happen, but K1 could intentionally punt the ball sideways to "wideout" K2 who catches the ball behind the NZ and advances for a FD. Here K never intended to give up possession, the kick never crossed the NZ, R never touched it, yet the clock will start on the snap since a team has been awarded a new series following a legal kick (I know that's totally "out there," but if this were a pass instead of a kick, the clock would start on the ready if the play ended in bounds, even though the intent of both is the same).