Sorry

Here's a kickball question.

A1 is making a bounce pass to A2. B1 trys to intercept the pass. B1 sticks his hand and his leg out, in a blocking motion. The ball hits B1's hand then deflects off his leg. Is this a kickball? Also, if A1 throws the ball off of B1's leg, is that a kickball? Sorry for the kickball questions, but just trying to settle an argument with a friend. Thanks a lot.

[d1ref2b]

To be a kicked ball the act must be intentional.

[Hartsy]

Here's my take, for what it's worth. Surely there will be someone more qualified than me to better answer this.

Neither situation is a violation. The first one is close, though. The kicked ball violation is only when the kick is intentional. I don't see this in either case.

In case one, there was an attempt to block the pass with a kick, but the attempt failed, so unlike attempted murder, no violation.

Imagine If we had to call attempted fouls!

JH

Okay, thanks for the replies. On the first situation I mentioned, the act is intentional, but his hand made contact first, then knocked off of his leg. Is that a kickball, because he's trying to stop the pass with either his hand or his leg, it just happened to hit his hand first. Or does that not change anything at all? Thanks a lot.

[mick]

Originally posted by BBallinRick
Okay, thanks for the replies. On the first situation I mentioned, the act is intentional, but his hand made contact first, then knocked off of his leg. Is that a kickball, because he's trying to stop the pass with either his hand or his leg, it just happened to hit his hand first. Or does that not change anything at all? Thanks a lot.

BBallinRick,
I may have a kick in this case.
Intention was present.
I'd like to see the play.
mick

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by BBallinRick
Okay, thanks for the replies. On the first situation I mentioned, the act is intentional, but his hand made contact first, then knocked off of his leg. Is that a kickball, because he's trying to stop the pass with either his hand or his leg, it just happened to hit his hand first. Or does that not change anything at all? Thanks a lot.

Rick, the only way that you could rule a kicked ball violation on this play is to judge that a player deliberately kicked the ball after it went off his hand. I don't really know anybody with reflexes that are that good. It's always a judgement call anyway.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Hartsy
Here's my take, for what it's worth. Surely there will be someone more qualified than me to better answer this.

Neither situation is a violation. The first one is close, though. The kicked ball violation is only when the kick is intentional. I don't see this in either case.

In case one, there was an attempt to block the pass with a kick, but the attempt failed, so unlike attempted murder, no violation.

Imagine If we had to call attempted fouls!

JH

Imagine if I stopped calling *attempted* fouls...

[Hawks Coach]

I think that extending the foot into the passing lane was an intent to block the ball with the leg/foot. The fact that it hit the hand first does not mean that the subsequent kick has to happen in response to the new angle it took from the deflection. The combination of foot and hand was intended to block the pass, and it did.

But like mick said, I think you have to see it to call it. If the passer was close to the defender occurred, and the foot and hand are pretty close together and working together to deny the passing lane, you could easily rule that the defender intended the foot to block the pass - kick. If the hand is clearly extended to block a pass that is made at a decent distance from the defender, and the foot happens to hit the deflection, it would probably look a lot more incidental. Gotta see this play.

The second situation, if you mean a ball is thrown into a non-moving foot/lower leg, is most certainly not a kick. You must be moving your foot as an initial precondition to kick the ball.

[oatmealqueen]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Hartsy
[B] Surely there will be someone more qualified than me to better answer this.





Mick's your man, but don't call him Shirley (surely)

[mick]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by oatmealqueen

Originally posted by Hartsy
Surely there will be someone more qualified than me to better answer this.





Mick's your man, but don't call him Shirley (surely)

I can straddle the fence pretty well when I want.
mick someone else.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Rick, the only way that you could rule a kicked ball violation on this play is to judge that a player deliberately kicked the ball after it went off his hand. I don't really know anybody with reflexes that are that good. It's always a judgement call anyway.

Not sure I agree.

He intentionally kicked at the ball and did indeed strike it.
He did not catch the ball, so the pass did not end, the ball is still loose and there's no PC.
The fact that it hit his hand first isn't material IMHO. Let's say he just barely tipped it with the tip of his finger.

I have a kicked ball.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

Rick, the only way that you could rule a kicked ball violation on this play is to judge that a player deliberately kicked the ball after it went off his hand. [/B]

Not sure I agree.

He intentionally kicked at the ball and did indeed strike it.

The fact that it hit his hand first isn't material IMHO. Let's say he just barely tipped it with the tip of his finger.

I have a kicked ball.
[/B][/QUOTE]You don't agree? I think that we're both saying about the same thing above, aren't we?

[Camron Rust]

Maybe this is what you two have said but for clarity, I'm going to give my 2.5 cents (inflation)....


No kick. The foot as intentionally used, missed the ball. The ball was deflected onto the leg/foot by the hand. The pass was not stopped by the kick.