Double Scrimmage Kick

[Rich]

Originally Posted by sorrydog

Had this yesterday in JV game: Punter kicks the ball right into the butt of one of his blockers. Ball shanks off his rear, bounces on the ground and right back to the punter who kicks it again. We threw a flag for Illegal kick. Never seen if before? Did we make the correct call?

No.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[sorrydog]

Originally Posted by Rich

No.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Ok. U said no. Whats the correct call?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by sorrydog

Ok. U said no. Whats the correct call?

Why can't he kick the ball again? What rule disallows it?

[ilyazhito]

Touching in the neutral zone is ignored, so A has the option and ability to advance the ball to the line to gain, or the option to kick again. This means that the play starts with a clean slate after the ball hit the blocker's butt, and thus the second scrimmage kick is legal.

[CT1]

(NFHS) As long as the ball is recovered behind the NZ, K can do anything they could do at the start of the play: run, pass or kick.

[sorrydog]

Originally Posted by CT1

(NFHS) As long as the ball is recovered behind the NZ, K can do anything they could do at the start of the play: run, pass or kick.

Thanks.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by sorrydog

Thank you! Over the years, we could post stuff on this site and get a answer without others being a smart-ass. Now looks like a few have now joined and instead of answering with a rule or knowledge, they want to make fun and criticize the poster. And "YES" I know how to look-up the rule. In the past, most of us post stuff like this just to get others to think about the play. If this is the new trend of making fun of officials that post stuff instead of keeping it professional, I'll delete my account and move on.

We're not making fun. We're just expecting that you tell us what rule you think applies, is all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by sorrydog

Thank you! Over the years, we could post stuff on this site and get a answer without others being a smart-ass. Now looks like a few have now joined and instead of answering with a rule or knowledge, they want to make fun and criticize the poster. And "YES" I know how to look-up the rule. In the past, most of us post stuff like this just to get others to think about the play. If this is the new trend of making fun of officials that post stuff instead of keeping it professional, I'll delete my account and move on.

I teach classes, give presentations, or answer many rules questions. I do not think it is being a smart ass at all to ask you or anyone that asks a question to tell us why something is illegal or legal in the rulebook, based on a question. I am going to assume that you would be asking for some reason. You are asking because you have doubt or you are asking because someone told you otherwise. I do not think it is all unfair to ask you to show your work so to speak. At least for me, when someone just gives me the answer, I do not remember it. When I look it up or have to explain why I feel a certain way, I tend to learn the situation better.

I think the newer trend is officials are in their feelings when you do not hold their hand on everything. When I was coming up we would be asked many questions when we asked a rules question or made a rules assumption. But we are in a new era.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by sorrydog

And we wonder why there's a official shortage?

Cause too many of them are too lazy to pick up a rules book?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[asdf]

Originally Posted by sorrydog

No doubt a Legend in your on mind!

You threw a flag.....

When an official throws a flag, it's because he/she detected a violation of a rule....

You were asked what rule was violated.....

You got your feelings hurt.....


When you delete your account, please make sure that you do the same with your officiating license.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by sorrydog

And we wonder why there's a official shortage?

If this is the reason, then what are they going to do when a coach is on them about something more contentious? Seriously, the coach I had last night was way more hostile than anything said here to you. Again, but we are in a different era.

You are more worried about someone asking you a question than why the question was asked in the first place. IJS.

Peace

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by sorrydog

Thank you! Over the years, we could post stuff on this site and get a answer without others being a smart-ass. Now looks like a few have now joined and instead of answering with a rule or knowledge, they want to make fun and criticize the poster. And "YES" I know how to look-up the rule. In the past, most of us post stuff like this just to get others to think about the play. If this is the new trend of making fun of officials that post stuff instead of keeping it professional, I'll delete my account and move on.

But...there's nothing to look up here. You can't find anything in the rule book to say this is legal. Most stuff that's legal is just not illegal. The book can't list everything you might do that's legal.

[CT1]

The general principle in all NFHS sports is:
If it’s not proscribed as being illegal, then it’s legal.

So, if you can’t find a rule or case play that forbids an action (such as a second kick from behind the LOS), it’s quite likely OK.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by CT1

The general principle in all NFHS sports is:
If it’s not proscribed as being illegal, then it’s legal.

Not just NFHS...that's a gen'l principle used by everyone in writing rules for sports whose play flows similarly to football. The presumption is of action's being legal. It's not an absolute presumption; there's always a loophole in such rules about "travesty of the game" or similar criterion that makes it illegal to go obviously beyond the bounds of the spirit of the game. You know, like turning a fire hose on the players, opening a trap door, or pulsing the lighting to induce seizures.

Some games are of the type where procedures are spelled out so as to give the players a limited range of choices: You can do A, B, or C, period. But games like football have their rules written more like, you can do anything you can think of except A, B, or C.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by sorrydog

Yep. Kind of why the question was asked. I do read the rule book and case book almost DAILY. Sometimes it can be confusing so in the past one could ask the question here and get interpretations. But first time I've ever ran into a lecture. Ego's came out of the woodwork on this one!

Sorry, I've been as kind as possible, but you're just looking for reasons to be offended. If you aren't willing to put any effort into getting better yourself, why should we help you?

No more post about egos. They....and you....will be deleted.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro