more firsts

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Your other references have no relevance in the discussion of this play. Apparently you are disturbed by the use of the verb rake in this situation.
Okay, the player intentionally used his foot to play the ball. He extended the foot, gently struck the ball, and pushed it back to himself. It was a kicking violation.

JAR,
This has NOTHING to do with your use of the verb rake. It has everything to do with the use of the word "striking" when discussing a kick and in these other references in the Rules Book. Players placing their foot on top of the ball and rolling the ball back to themselves have USED their foot, but they have not "struck" the ball in the sense that the word "striking" is used elsewhere in the Rules Book.

I am not objecting as to whether the INTENT of the Rules Book is to consider this use of the foot to be illegal. I am merely suggesting that in lieu of using the words "intentionally striking the ball with the foot (or leg)" the wording should be changed to "intentionally contacting the ball with the foot (or leg)". This change in the wording would eliminate any question as to the intent of this rule.