Onside Kick

[BigGref]

Here's a stitch I had last season that I was wondering about, before I found this forum.

I'm HL, team A is kicking off to B, they usually do that, A attempts an onside kick. It only goes about 6-7 yards, when A1 inadvertently pushes B1 into the ball (from the side), who had previously not attempted to recover the ball. Then B1 comes very close, possibly even did touch the ball. Team A recovers it about 7-8 yards from A's free kick line.

Since I could not determine for sure that he did touch the ball, and the fact that he was blocked into it if it had indeed touched him, I gave the ball to B (forgetting about the Illegal touch b4 10 yrds)

Is the "blocked into the ball" part of the play legal, illegal, etc. FED rules.

Thanks ahead of time!

[Snake~eyes]

Okay I'm out of season and not going by books, but I do believe touching by a player blocked into the kick is ignored. Team B's ball where A recovered. Again I'm not 100% because I'm not in football mode at the moment but maybe someone can confirm what I've said, or the correct ruling if I'm wrong.

[BigGref]

I tried to look it up, but I forgot that I would first have to be able to find my rule books!

[DoubleD]

BigG,
I'm a (fed) HL too...
I think Snake~eyes got it right.
and I'll add, what "illegal touch" on the free kick? There's no penalty on this play.

Remember, the clock is not run until the ball is touched (but not first-touching); First touching on a free kick can only occur in the 10-yd NZ...after that it's "free". And if K recovers, we're not letting them advance so zero time should run.

So, with R being blocked into the ball by K, that touching is ignored, and you still haven't wound the clock!
If you thought R then touched the ball, you would have wound the clock. When K recovered, you would have stopped the clock, and indicated posession, right?

Easy to explain to the coach, "Why did I wind the clock if your guy didn't touch the ball?"

But, because you didn't see R touch the ball, the clock remained "not-started", and you blew the play dead when K recovered. Since the other touching was ignored, the ball didn't go 10-yards, R gets the ball where K recovered/first-touching. They're simultaneous in your case.

One other thing, I've assumed the ball was on the ground here...if it was in the air (unlikely), then you'd have a potential kick-catching interference on K for nailing R before the kick touched the ground.

[BigGref]

All you said sounds about right, at least what I did. I don't know about the clock, it wasn't important at the time; it was an "out of the blue" onside kick.

Yes it was on the ground.

I'll add a little more, see where we go from there. Say that R was going towards the ball at the time, and K just "helped" him fall into it; same thing or do we have judge intent to touch by R as well?

I just got on a crew as U, so next year I will be far away from even trying to judge all of this, thankfully!

[Snake~eyes]

Originally posted by BigGref
I'll add a little more, see where we go from there. Say that R was going towards the ball at the time, and K just "helped" him fall into it; same thing or do we have judge intent to touch by R as well?

Well could you add a little more? How did K help him fall into it? Where'd he hit him? How'd R touch the ball? Have to be more specific here.

[kentref]

One thing you might think about is asking the kicker, (when you hand him the ball before the free kick), if he is "kicking away" or not? If he says, "onsides" then you're clued in, and if you have a pre-arranged signal then the rest of your crew will be clued in as well.
As a HL, I ask this question before every free kick, regardless of the situation.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: Just to clarify some points made by Double-D...If you are certain that R touched the ball after being blocked into it, you still do not start the clock since you are "ignoring" the touch by R (NF 6-1-5). On the other hand, if the free kick is beyond the 10 yard neutral zone, and K muffs it, the clock is started at that point since such touching by K is "legal" touching, i.e. not "first touching." (NF 3-4-2 & 3-4-3). Double-D may have been saying as much, but I may have been too dense to see it!

One other note...through last season, the only time you "ignored" touching of a free or scrimmage kick by R was if K blocked him into it. Beginning this season, you will also ignore R's touching if K bats or muffs a kick (scrimmage or free) into R. Last year you wouldn't have. Makes for some interesting diffrences in how such plays will be ruled in 2004.

[BigGref]

Originally posted by Bob M.
Beginning this season, you will also ignore R's touching if K bats or muffs a kick (scrimmage or free) into R. Last year you wouldn't have. Makes for some interesting diffrences in how such plays will be ruled in 2004.

Do you happen to have a link to the new changes? or do you just have some insight to the rules commitee meeting?

[BigGref]

Never mind, found NFHS link!
http://www.nfhs.org/scriptcontent/va...content_id=223
For those interested

[simpson]

Originally posted by Bob M.
One other note...through last season, the only time you "ignored" touching of a free or scrimmage kick by R was if K blocked him into it. Beginning this season, you will also ignore R's touching if K bats or muffs a kick (scrimmage or free) into R. Last year you wouldn't have. Makes for some interesting diffrences in how such plays will be ruled in 2004.

Am I missing something here? If K bats or muffs a kick into R, K would have to first touch the ball so R's touching is irrelevant.

Sorry, I just don't understand the need for this rule change.

[mikesears]

Originally posted by simpson

Am I missing something here? If K bats or muffs a kick into R, K would have to first touch the ball so R's touching is irrelevant.

Sorry, I just don't understand the need for this rule change.

Bob M. did an outstanding job addressing this issue in an earlier post but I will try to re-enter what he wrote.

R loses the right to take the ball at the spot of first touching if they foul after touching the ball.

Example: K1 punts. K2 muffs the ball into R1. R2 then blocks K3 in the back. K4 recovers the ball.
2003 Ruling: K's ball 1/10 at spot of recovery. R cannot take the ball at spot of first touching because they fouled.
2004 Ruling: Touching by R1 is ignored--meaning they never "touched" the ball. Therefore, R can take the ball at the spot of first touching.

Another issue is about who caused a free-kick to go out of bounds. If we ignore touching if K muffs the ball into R, it makes a big difference.

Anyone else think of other scenerios?

[Bob M.]

REPLY: Mike, Thanks for the kind words. Another (probably more typical) situation would be a punt where K bats the ball toward his goal line (legal) to keep it from entering R's endzone and it bangs off R's leg.

And just to go back to simpson's post. As he described it, yes, in most cases prior to 2004, because of the first touch, R's touching would be irrelevant. But it still would have been touching by R. Now for 2004, you completely ignore the touch. It never happened.

[DoubleD]

Another 2004 scenario would be during an "onsides" free-kick.

Say R was foolish enough to step into the 10-yard NZ (he moves up 3 yards after the kick), K legally bats the ball off R's helmet or body, and K recovers.

If the ball never left the 10-yard NZ during all that, R will have the ball, and two choices of where to put it in play: spot of recovery or K's bat (first touching).

[Coach Gerry Faust]

I have only worked HL/L in Varsity and Sub-Varsity games.
The games we read on-side kick were also read by the receiving team.(luckily)
For me working this position is my greatest fear during a punt or on-side kick!
I have never used a signal for this obvious play situation.
What type of signal could be used for this play?
Should we signal from the side line or when spotting the ball on the field for the kicker?
God Bless,
Coach Faust