|
cmatthews, I got that term "violation" from an article I read in Referee. I guess you could argue they're not always right, but you would be incorrect in saying that First Touching is a legal act. That's why it has a consequence that's consistent with penalties and why it's sometimes referred to (although an unofficial term) as a violation and not a penalty.
Has anyone else ever heard of FT being referred to as a violation?
Either way you look at it, if FT were a legal act then why doesn't the ball simply become dead and belong to R when K finally possesses the ball.
Consider this play. K kicks from K50. K touches the ball at R's 30 and finally recovers the ball at R20. If FT were a legal act, then HOW could you justify giving R the ball at the 30 (the spot of first touching)? You couldn't! If so, then I'd challenge with "what rule would support this?"
See my point?
|