Quote:
Originally posted by cmathews
Maybe this is one of those situations that the Fed now needs to address...here is one more thought...allthough I do think it should probably be a TB. If the illegal kick is to be treated as a fumble, and a fumble is defined as lost player possesion, it wouldn't be a huge reach to say the kick ended...because as was mentioned above, you can't assume that the fed means a legal kick into the end zone, you can't really assume that the illegal kick is the only kick on the play that says it should be treated as a fumble...I think you could argue these points with a coach and win, and thus keeping R from benefiting from the foul... but in reality I will go with the more popular ruling  Touch Back PSK enforcement
|
First, you could argue those points, but they will probably be over the heads of 99% of the coaches.
As for R benefiting from committing the foul: sometimes taking the penalty is the "smart" move considering the alternative. If a B cornerback is beat and his choices are take the 15 (or 30) yard DPI call or give up a TD, the smart play is to tackle the receiver, lose the yards, but keep the 6 off the board. Here B had benefited from committing a foul, but I think most people would argue that he made the right play. In the kick play presented, R's only choices may be commit a foul and keep the ball, or run the high risk of having K recover in great field position. Its not really our job to determine if a team benefits from committing a foul.