Offensive Kicking?
 

Sometimes, during a loose ball and/or scrum, I observe a kick. Intentional? Not sure, but when the leg is in the air and the ball very obviously and noisily caroms in some random direction, it's hard not to put air in the whistle.

Then I notice the "kicker" was from the team in control. So we're going the other way, and I get a few incredulous looks from the bench. Like they didn't think it was possible for the offense to commit a kicking violation. :confused:

In truth, I admit it doesn't feel normal to call this violation on the team in control. Like it's not the intent of the rule. Anyone else ever experience this conundrum?

Intent of the Rule?
 

Let me get this straight. Before you call a kicking violation you first intellectually determine which team is in control in order to decide whether or not to call the violation?

4-29: Kicking the ball is intentionally striking it with any part of the leg or foot.
9-4: A player shall not...intentially kick (the ball) as in 4-29.

I might have kicked a kick now and then, but feeling and abnormality isn't part of the equation. Has always felt normal, regardless which team committed this violation, if that's what it was.

Does it seem to anyone else that the OP makes this more difficult than it needs to be? Or is it just me?

Not sure why you think it is a conundrum.

And I'm also confused as to why you think spirit of the rule about kicking the ball was intended only for the defense. :confused:

Gooooooooal ...
 

Back in the days when I was working boys high school age recreation games, I observed a two on none fast break. In his haste to advance the ball, the ball handler lost the handle on his dribble, and made a perfectly aimed kick to his teammate for an easy layup. I called the violation and later found out that the kicker was the star of the high school soccer team.

https://youtu.be/8AMIrxx3gx8

The Theory Of Everything ...
 

I don't fully subscribe to the theory (only for the defense), the interpretation most certainly doesn't come from the NFHS, but I've heard it more than once over my career.

The theory is based on the intent (intentional) part of the definition, and rule.

Unless a player is an expert soccer player, or an expert football kicker, most players would have very little control over an intentional kick, thus, an intentional kick would certainly be an inaccurate, and ineffective, method of passing the ball from an offensive player to a teammate (exception in my post above). Due to the difficulty of doing it accurately, and effectively, offensive players would probably never intentionally choose to pass the ball in such a manner. No intent means no violation. A ball ricocheting off the leg of an offensive player could be considered accidental, not intentional.

Defensive players will intentionally do almost anything to disrupt the offensive plays of the opponent, including intentionally kicking the ball to prevent a pass from being successful. Intent means a violation. A ball ricocheting off the leg of an defensive player should almost always be considered intentional, not accidental.

Don't kill the messenger, I don't fully subscribe to the theory, I'm just repeating what I've heard over the past thirty-five years.

It's a good guideline when the team with TC is really "controlling" (the English meaning, not the rules meaning) the ball.

But when the ball is "loose", then it certainly happens that the team with TC can kick the ball (to stop it, or to draw it closer to a player, or to get it out of reach of a defender)

I see offensive players often try to kick the ball to prevent the defense from getting to the basketball or to try to maintain control. Now are they kicking the ball like another sport? Nope, they are just using their leg to try to keep the possession or keep it away from the defense. But this is becoming very common and one reason I believe is we did not call it on the offense that offensive players try and often get away with doing this. As stated, this not like 3 seconds, where only one side of the ball can be called for this violation with several other factors involved.

Peace

Interesting, Very Interesting ...
 

Two esteemed Forum members who are, at least, familiar with the philosophy, right, or wrong, described in crosscountry55's thread starter?

And I just thought that it was an old wives' tale spoken over adult beverages at some local watering holes by some old-timers here in my little corner of Connecticut.

Not I.

This winter, I had a MS Boys game where Team A secured a rebound and then lost player control of the ball. A1 and B1 then go for the loose ball and I'm looking to see if we have a held ball or a foul. As the ball rolls towards A1's legs, A1 kicks it soccer-style away from B1.

A kicked ball on A1 here was an easy call to make.

Can't Sound The Whistle Fast Enough ...
 

Easy peasy lemon squeezy. Good example involving a loose ball (always listen to bob). We certainly can call kicking violations on offensive players.

The committee has stated, clearly, that the intent of the rule is to make players play the ball with their hands. This isn't soccer.

That said, if you're not sure it was intentional, you may want to hold your whistle.

Scenarios then (beyond OP) which to you put air in the whistle on:

1) Player on the floor loses strack of the ball. Turns away from contact to try to stand up and back leg kicks the ball towards the sideline.

2) Defensively player running to close out. Offense tries the throw bounce pass to tight and hits running player in the foot. Kicks back to passer.

3) Defensively player in a stance. Offense tries to throw bounce pass and the defender sticks out leg kick save style to deflect ball to half?

4) Player is laying on back ball bounces off fingers and they stick their legs up in the air to stop the ball from going foward. Bounces off legs back into their possession?

Easy -

In #1 & #2 contact with leg was not intentional on the part of the player - no violation.
In #3 & #4 leg contacting ball was caused by intentional act of the player - violation in both cases.

The rule is really pretty simple and I don't see the controversy - any player that intentionally strikes the ball with any part of their leg has committed a violation.

Yea, I don't see how this is confusing. Just because it's the offense doesn't mean they can't intentionally kick the ball. Just observe play if someone intentionally kicks it, blow the whistle

Wrong. The intent of the rule is thou shall not intentionally kick. It makes no difference whether it is offense or defence.

It becomes confusing because someone gives a general guideline, and someone else takes it as the absolute rule (and repeats it, and it gets distorted in the retelling....)

With nothing meant about any poster in this thread. Just a general statement.

Wasn't their an interpretation where pinning the ball between feet and legs constituted a kick? Because you don't use feet or legs to control the ball? ...

Kicked ball violations can be called on any of the players in the game.. Offense and defense. And might I add.. I've never seen an offensive player get called for this in upper ranks (ncaa and nba). And the only kicked balls I've seen called are when an offensive player throws the ball at a defenders foot.. So it isn't even a true violation.

Might I add.. Just for help with future situations-
(Mainly for new referees)

Kicked ball violation: Any INTENTIONAL contact with the ball by ANY players FOOT or ANY PART OF THE LEG.

I say this because it doesn't matter if offense or defense kicks it. If it's intentional leg contact- violation. If it's a loose ball (no team control) and contact is {INTENTIONAL}- kicked ball violation. It really helps to keep this in mind.

I've had situations where players have grabbed the ball with their feet and moved it away while on their backs. No kick.. But still a kicked ball violation.

Again- for new referees or anyone who wants to know my personal helper:

If you're not sure- ask yourself "was it intentional leg or foot contact?"

Violation is pretty clear and easy to get.

HOWEVER . . . we'ev all worked with those people and for new officials if you work with those guys often and early you can develop bad habits. I had a partner my first couple of years who wouldn't call violations like (kick ball, travels, illegal dribbles) unless they were balatant. I mean unless the player drop kicked the ball like a punter he would insist that it wasn't intentional.

Violations may not be the sexiest calls in the game and I know that a lot people here would espouse that you dont' want travelling to be your best call. All that said if you consistently and effecively get your violations as an official, the game cleans up and slows down (either literally or figuratively as you get better at seeing things at pace) to make it easier for you to officiate.

And in both sports, it's only an infraction when it's done DELIBERATELY. There are a lot of parellels between both sports in this area.

For example, in basketball, if A-1 looks to pass the ball past B-2, B-2 jumps, and the pass hits the ball in his leg, we generally have a kicking violation here. The leg motion may not be toward the ball, but the defender has, in essence, made himself bigger, and caused the kicking act. The same goes in soccer: if a defender puts his arms out to stop a pass ("making himself bigger"), it's a handling foul.

Another parallel: People will incorrectly cry for an whistle immediately when a basketball touches a foot or a soccer ball touches a hand.

To the OP's point, the most common "offensive" kicking violation I see is the rare instance when loose ball that a player tries to secure on the floor, between his thighs.

I'd only agree with that IF, by jumping, you mean that the player stuck a leg out to the side while jumping...which is not a natural part of the jumping movement. Jumping up alone with not be a kick in my games.

To me, it isn't about the leg moving toward the ball but moving or being into the path of the ball such that it is not a natural part some other movement (e.g., running, shifting, etc.).

Last Train To Clarksville (The Monkees, 1967) ...
 

Traveling is the hardest call for me to make, not block/charge, not managing coaches, not ricochets out of bounds.

If I had a game, and traveling was my best call in that game, I would be quite pleased with myself.

I think it's a relatively easy call, but I've found it's difficult to "sell" the non-call when Team A tries to force a bounce pass through traffic. Essentially, they throw the ball into a defender's shin/foot. I won't blow my whistle. Then, invariably, Team B recovers the carom and Team A's coach is yelling for a KICK

Your coaches suck. :)

I've seen it and called it many times. Especially in lower level ball i.e. men's wreck league.