View Single Post
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 16, 2013, 10:24pm
Robert Goodman Robert Goodman is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,876
Quote:
Originally Posted by ump33 View Post
I believe 2-24-3 defines a Legal Free Kick as is any legal kick that is used to put the ball in play. It does not state only a Legal Free Kick may put the ball in play.

Take a look at 2-24-9, it defines a Illegal Kick as kick that does not comply with 2-24-3. It also states if the ball is loose following an Illegal Kick, it is treated as a fumble. If the ball is loose and treated as a fumble, it must be live.

I think we flag it, let the play continue and enforce from the previous spot if accepted
You have a point.

But I think the real point is that Fed is overstuffing Rule 2, putting too many things into definitions when they'd really be more comfortably handled as substantive provisions. Rule 2 has gotten very big in recent decades compared to other numbered Rules. Definitions are useful only to save repetition; you can practically use a computer program to determine which phrases recur and could benefit from being condensed into technical terms. Fed & NCAA have gone way beyond that.

Take for instance Fed's 2-3, "Blocking". It suffers from lack of parallelism because it includes language which is actually substantive, regarding permissions & prohibitions, rather than definitive. Sorry, Fed, arts. 2 thru 6 do not belong there, they belong in Rule 9. Same with 2-17 arts. 2 thru 4.
Reply With Quote