[KWH]

Originally posted by Theisey

Theisey-
I will have to break you message down and answer your individual questions.

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.
I disagree, it is an exception in NCAA and it is a new enforcment spot in NFHS! But if you want to call in an exception that is your right. Just so long as you enfoce the penalty as per the NFHS 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.
If you choose not to buy-in to that concept then perhaps another concept may work better. Take a look at 2003 NFHS Rule Book Page 66 "Football Fundamentals.I(3) which states: A loose ball is in possession of the team whose player was last in possession unless post scrimmage kick applies.


I never said to eliminate double foul/offsetting fouls. I said that PSK should be an exception to that under NF rules.
Theisey, NO EXCEPTION IS REQUIRED!!! NFHS Rule 10-2-1c gives YOU exactly what YOU are looking for and that is the right of R to keep the ball. And to do so all R has to do is decline the K foul (if they have met all the requirments of PSK).

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.
The people that are rambling on on the other websites areWRONG!!! THEY ARE READING TOO MUCH INTO IT. They are picking up on the conflicts in the Rule Books and are confused. But unfortunatly along with being confused they are printing misleading information.

For simplification purposes lets take look at the play in question:
Play: K's ball, fourth and ten from its own 10-yard line. K1's punt is downed at K's 40-yard line. While the kick was in flight R2 blocks K3 in the back at K's 35-yard line. At the snap K was flagged for an illegal formation (6 on the line.)
Ruling: R may gain possession by declining the penalty for K4's foul. K could then accept the penalty for R2's foul and PSK applies. The penalty is enforced from the end of the kick, since that spot is behind the spot of the foul, yeilding first and 10 for R from the 50 yard line. If R accepts K's penalty, the penalties offset and the down is replayed.
This ruling is fully supported by NFHS 10-2-1c since the R captain delined the K foul. This ruling would also be fully supported by NFHS 10-2-1c had the R captain accepted K's foul.
If you would like add a facemask foul against K on the 50 yard line. As long as R declines both the Facemask and the Illegal Formation they get to keep the football after enforcment of the R foul.

As a sidebar it is my belief that while the wording in the NCAA rule book might be slightly different the result of this play is the same under NCAA penalty enforcement provisions.

I don't care about NFL rules as they can dance to whatever tune they want too.
I concur!!!

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.
That is the whole point of entire post! The NFHS concept is EXACTLY the same concept

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.
That statment is incorrect. If all the conditions of PSK are met, and even if a foul occurs agains both team. If R declines K's foul they WILL retain the football! Unfortunatly Theisey it appears you have been misled.

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."
The kicking team will retain the football after enforcment of any accepted R foul

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.
WE CAN NOT ALL SEE YOUR POINT! YOU'RE INTERETATION IS WRONG!!! R gets to keep the ball just like the NCAA rules AS LONG AS ALL THE PROVISIONS OF PSK ARE MET!
Jerry DeihL also stated "the double foul provisions remains the same"
Unfortunatly many have misuderstood what he meant by this. Of course it "remains the same" as I have explained above BUT REMEMBER, IF R DELINCES ALL K FOUL'S, A DOUBLE FOUL SITUATION NO LONGER EXISTS!!!

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 forwarded 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.
No, OREGON experimented with the rule that requires 5 players on each side of the kicker during a FREE KICK.
To the best of my knowledge no information was recorded from officials regarding the experimental rule.

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.
[b] You are right on the money on this one! They did a lousey job! But lets spin it around and look at the bright side. NFHS now has PSK. Now we just need to get the wordings correct since it has become quite obvious that because of the lousy job the committee did of writing it down on paper some confusion exsists...

In closing
Theisey, I would hope you would consider all of my resposnse's to you as a professional disagreement and therefore take nothing I have said as personal. I would also hope we could work a game together someday. (But not the first one of this coming season!)