Kicking Violation Philosophy

[blindzebra]

Kicking violation for dummies:

Did the ball hit the leg = legal.

Did the leg hit the ball = illegal.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Kicking violation for dummies:

Did the ball hit the leg = legal.

Did the leg hit the ball = illegal.

This is good. We have something similar in baseball:

Fair ball hits dropped bat = legal, play on.

Dropped bat hits fair ball = illegal, batter out.

[JugglingReferee]

B1's foot was already in the spot. Her legs were extended outward at about a 45 degree angle from the vertical position. She did this leg extension in reaction to A1's fake. There was no positive movement towards the ball.

General Reply:

I was the covering official and I did not have a whistle; I let the play stand. Coach was fuming about the no-call and said that I needed to read the rulebook. I am 100% confident in my no-call, but it has been _years_ since I recall talking about this situation with anyone.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

B1's foot was already in the spot. Her legs were extended outward at about a 45 degree angle from the vertical position. She did this leg extension in reaction to A1's fake. There was no positive movement towards the ball.

General Reply:

I was the covering official and I did not have a whistle; I let the play stand. Coach was fuming about the no-call and said that I needed to read the rulebook. I am 100% confident in my no-call, but it has been _years_ since I recall talking about this situation with anyone.

I've got a kick on this.....B1's leg was extended in a position to block an anticipated pass. Even if it was there before the pass was released, it was still intentional.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I've got a kick on this.....B1's leg was extended in a position to block an anticipated pass. Even if it was there before the pass was released, it was still intentional.

Agreed. The intent was to stop a pass, whether that pass had been thrown yet or not. At least, that's the way I'm envisioning this play...

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Agreed. The intent was to stop a pass, whether that pass had been thrown yet or not. At least, that's the way I'm envisioning this play...

This is a big can of worms, I believe.

At any time a player is "stuck", you are saying that they can fake a pass, and if an opponent's leg moves at all, a subsequent pass to that leg's new position is now a kicked ball.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I've got a kick on this.....B1's leg was extended in a position to block an anticipated pass. Even if it was there before the pass was released, it was still intentional.

Okay, what if B1 makes an overt move to get his leg in the passing lane but only does so by sticking his leg beyond his frame with his foot still on the floor, there is a delay and the pass then hits his leg.

You calling a kick on that too?

In my opinion if the ball comes to where the leg already is, it isn't intentionally striking the ball, it's a bad pass.

Ball comes to leg = legal.

Leg goes to ball = illegal.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Okay, what if B1 makes an overt move to get his leg in the passing lane but only does so by sticking his leg beyond his frame with his foot still on the floor, there is a delay and the pass then hits his leg.

You calling a kick on that too?

In my opinion if the ball comes to where the leg already is, it isn't intentionally striking the ball, it's a bad pass.

Ball comes to leg = legal.

Leg goes to ball = illegal.

BZ:

It appears that you are starting to adopt my type of thinking.

Kicking the ball is a violatioin ONLY when the player INTENTIONALLY strikes the ball with his leg. Contact between the ball and the leg when the player's leg movement is a normal movement to maintain a defensive postion or to move from one positon to another is not a violation. If the player's leg is in contact with the floor when there is contact between the player's leg and ball, there cannot be a kicking violation.

If a defensive player throws his leg out at a ball to block a passing lane afther the ball has already left the thrower's hand and the contact between the ball and the defensive player's leg occurs before the defensive player's foot regains contact with floor: that is an example of a kicking violation.

But, if a defensive player throws his leg out at a ball to block a passing lane afther the ball has already left the thrower's hand and the contact between the ball and the defensive player's leg occurs after the defensive player's foot regains contact with floor: there is not kicking violation.

MTD, Sr.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

BZ:

It appears that you are starting to adopt my type of thinking..

Hey, BZ, run!!!

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

If the player's leg is in contact with the floor when there is contact between the player's leg and ball, there cannot be a kicking violation.

I understand everything you're saying, but I disagree with this statement.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

I understand everything you're saying, but I disagree with this statement.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
If the player's leg is in contact with the floor when there is contact between the player's leg and ball, there cannot be a kicking violation.


HawkeyeCub:

What is there to disagree with. What you are proposing is, that if B1 is standing between A1 and A2, and A1 attempts to pass the ball to A2 by throwing a bounce pass through B1's legs and instead his pass hits B1's shin while he is standing between A1 and A2, then B1 has committed a kicking violation. If that is what you are advocating, that is wrong. Just because the contact created an advantage for B1, the contact was not intentional and therefore is not a violation.

MTD, Sr.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Okay, what if B1 makes an overt move to get his leg in the passing lane but only does so by sticking his leg beyond his frame with his foot still on the floor, there is a delay and the pass then hits his leg.

You calling a kick on that too?

Maybe. A player can't intentionally use their leg/foot to contact the ball. Period. If I judge that the player has "used" it in such a manner (to actually block a pass or discourage a pass that eventually hits the leg), it's a kick....no matter if they had it there before the ball was thrown or not.

If that leg is in more of a typical guarding stance....knees slightly out...no kick.

Originally Posted by blindzebra

In my opinion if the ball comes to where the leg already is, it isn't intentionally striking the ball, it's a bad pass.

Ball comes to leg = legal.

Leg goes to ball = illegal.

Mostly, I agree....except for when the defender extends the leg with the purpose of taking away a passing lane with the leg (and not for moving themselves in that direction). The defender doesn't get to cover 2 extra feet of space with their legs if they can get them there before the ball.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Maybe. A player can't intentionally use their leg/foot to contact the ball. Period. If I judge that the player has "used" it in such a manner (to actually block a pass or discourage a pass that eventually hits the leg), it's a kick....no matter if they had it there before the ball was thrown or not.

If that leg is in more of a typical guarding stance....knees slightly out...no kick.



Mostly, I agree....except for when the defender extends the leg with the purpose of taking away a passing lane with the leg (and not for moving themselves in that direction). The defender doesn't get to cover 2 extra feet of space with their legs if they can get them there before the ball.

If a player isn't allowed to go outside his/her frame why isn't touching a pass with an out-stretched arm illegal?

The reason behind a kick and punching the ball being illegal is for safety not gaining an advantage by making yourself bigger.

I really think the spirit and intent of the rule needs to be used on this one.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

A couple of my esteemed colleagues have taken the position (no pun intended) that if a B1 takes a stance wider than his normal shoulder width stance so as to take away a passing lane has committed a kicking violation if the ball hits his leg even if he foot is touching the floor before the passed ball makes contact with his leg. I think they are trying to apply a screening rule to a non-screening situation.

Remember, a kicking violation is an intentional action taken by a player to kick the ball. If player’s foot is in contact with the floor when the contact with the ball occurs, there can be no kicking violation.

MTD, Sr.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

If a player isn't allowed to go outside his/her frame why isn't touching a pass with an out-stretched arm illegal?

Never said that being outside the frame was the sole reason....and the arms are clearly not the feet. I don't think we disagree on that point.

Originally Posted by blindzebra

The reason behind a kick and punching the ball being illegal is for safety not gaining an advantage by making yourself bigger.

I disagree with this. In a past NFHS statement referring to kicking, they said that game was intended to be played with the hands, not the feet. I can't recall safety ever being mentioned. It is not very likely that another player will get hurt in 99.999% of the occurrances of a kick. A punch, on the other hand, I can believe....it's is likely to be near other players heads it there is any reason to punch the ball at all.

Originally Posted by blindzebra

I really think the spirit and intent of the rule needs to be used on this one.

Agree....the design of the game is to play the ball with the hands, not the feet. The purpose of the feet is only to move the body. If the feet are used to play the ball (and not in a way to move the body) and make contact with the ball, I've got a kick.