Quote:
Originally Posted by ump33
This play was discussed at NFHS Forum at the following link:
NFHS Forum: Two Scrimmage Kicks
After much debate, the following reply was posted:
OFFICIAL NFHS RULING: Called on this and their ruling is that K, by kicking again, had given up possession and with it the right to a new series. K downing the kick becomes first touching under 5-1-3g. |
Right, and I wouldn't be surprised to see this show up in the case book.
When R muffs a scrimmage kick beyond the LOS, the team in possession at the end of the down will get a new series (5-1-3f). This is the provision that leads some to think that K should get the ball after the second kick.
However, the purpose of this kind of scrimmage kick is to initiate a change of possession. That's still true for the second kick. And the second kick is legal: no rule prohibits a second kick (compare the forward pass rule), the ball is not dead when K recovers a kick behind the NZ (6-2-3), and during any down a team may legally perform a scrimmage kick before team possession has changed (6-2-1).
A second legal kick need not betray an ignorance of the rules: if R blocks the kick and never touches it beyond the NZ, a second kick is not a bad idea.
But on this play K would have had a new series after recovering a kick that R muffed beyond the NZ, and in most cases they should just keep the ball. If NFHS had given K the ball in this play, that ruling would reward ignorance. I think that the reported ruling is right on the money.