|
If you know NCAA rules, you'll see that PSK is an exception.
Considering NF has used the previous spot for the enforcment spot on loose ball plays (and still is)"Except" for PSK. That by defintion, makes PSK an "Exception" under NF rules.
No, I do not buy into the concept the team possession changes when the kicked ball passes the ENZ. I stated that PSK is an exception to the offsetting fouls rule. That is true for NCAA and that is what I think as a long time official of both codes, should have been applied to our NF version of PSK.
I never said to eliminate double foul/offsetting fouls. I said that PSK should be an exception to that under NF rules.
The way PSK is written for NF and as I see it being interpertated in this fourm, other forums and from some documentation I'm now starting to receive, a double foul while the status of the ball is a kick will result in offsetting fouls, a replay and that means a rekick.
That is what I do not think is right and not the way PSK is handled under NCAA rules. I don't care about NFL rules as they can dance to whatever tune they want too. The PSK concept for NCAA is designed to allow team-B to keep the ball even though they fouled during scrimmage kick play. Team-A foul does not affect that.
PSK concept for NF does not allow that when a team-K foul such as for six players on the LOS occurs coupled with a clip down field during the kick.
If I may, I'll quote Jerry Diehl "since the kicking team has chosen to punt because if did not make the line to gain, the rationale was that the kicking team should not be able to retain possession of the ball in those situations."
He should have stated that the situation is when team-R had fouled during the play while the ball was loose as a result of the kick.
However as we all can see, they maintained that a team-K foul will offset this team-R foul. That's wrong and not keeping with the intent of PSK. The timing of the foul is also a wrong in concept and will be a problem for officials.
By any chance did Oregon participate in the PSK experiment?
I know KY did. The problem I have is at seasons end, all these rule inconsistencies could/should have been documented and forwared on up the chain of command to the committee so the rewording of the rules in every place required would be completed prior to printing.
I read someplace where it was stated that it could take 2 or 3 seasons to work out the kinks in this rule. My contention is that the experimental seasons are to take care of that. The final rule wording put in place that makes the change easy to officiate. The rules committee failed to do that.
|