I don't recall insulting you... as a matter of fact you called me freak. Is that supposed to be a copliment?
for get it. Like I said I forgive you ;-)
In any event, then you have answered the question, a simple "no" would have sufficed.
Thanks.

Wow - you're on fire. Insulting Bob was also not necessary. Where do you get off "Dude"ing us?

Of course he doesn't understand your post. Neither does anyone else. Did it occur to you that since two relatively common posters here failed to understand your point, that possibly it wasn't due to our collective dimness - possibly it was due to the incoherence of your post? Reread it? I reread it several times. I suspect Bob did as well. Still have no idea what point you were trying to make. (Heck... I don't even know which side of the argument you're on... the free kick is allowable in this situation (i.e. the correct side) or is not allowable (the wrong side).

Why don't you step back two steps, and rephrase what you were trying to say, so we can attempt to comment intelligently. You'll find that most of the posters here will attempt to discuss topics with you when you are polite.

I don't believe I called you a freak. I believe I shortened your handle because I couldn't remember how you had spelled it, and managed to misspell the last letter or two of that. I didn't choose your name - you did. My shortening of it was not intended as offense.

You say I answered your question. I answered 1 - you inferred there was another, but I've lost it.

I'm not going to get into a war of words with you. If you want to get back on topic, I'll respond. If not...

You have answered the question.
Since when is Dude an insult??
I think your... wel nevermind.
Dude was never meant to be an insult...
Perhapse I should change my handle to "Dude" :-)

P.S. Winks ";-)" and smiles ":-)" are not insulting either. In fact they are used to bring levity and candidness to an e-mail conversation. Would emoticons help?

Well its write in front of you all you had to do was look if you didn't remember. There is no second part to the question if the answer is no.

Dude this topis is over. I have better things to do...
L8R

Re: Advising the R??
 

REPLY: phreaqhopp...first of all, I've been called many things in my years on the field. "Dude" isn't one of them. But no offense taken. Here's what's got me (and apparently others) confused: You asked your question a while back but included with it a statement that is patently untrue:

The answer to your question is "no." Putting the ball in play by 'snap' is pretty much the default. If the coach/captain knew the rule that allowed him to free kick and asked for that option, by all means we would set up for the free kick and instruct both teams about what's going to happen since probably neither of them would have ever seen it. After 27 years of doing this, <b><u><i>I've</i></u></b> never seen it! Likewise, I would not ask the captain explicitly if he wanted to free kick. I would inform him that if the penalty was accepted, he would still retain the options he had on the prior down following his fair catch.

BUT...since your question was then followed by a statement that said that they could put the ball in play by a free kick and snap <u>simultaneously</u> by attempting a drop kick, we were justifiably confused. Since snap and free kick are mutually exclusive, we no longer understood the context in which you asked the question.