Scrimmage kick play

[The Roamin' Umpire]

Heh - didn't we just talk about this on the NFHS forum?

Anyhow - take a look at NFHS Casebook 6.5.7A. The Fed doesn't want this enforced as a PSK foul, but instead from the previous spot, resulting in 1/10 for K from the K48.

The problem is in the language defining PSK. I'll quote from my own post on the NFHS forum:

Consider a play where R commits any would-be PSK foul, and K downs (recovers) the punt.

2-16-2g5 says "K does not have possession of the ball when the down ends and will not be next to put the ball in play." (my emphasis) Since K does have possession when the down ends, this condition is false. They really want this to say "or" instead of "and."

But let's even assume that correction is made. Now K accepts the foul, which (by 5-1-6) cancels R's right to take possession at the spot of first touching. So, is it a PSK foul?

5-2-2 tells us that the ball belongs to A or K after a foul, unless it's a PSK foul. So, if it's not a PSK foul, then it's K's ball, confirming that it's not PSK. But if it is a PSK foul, then it's R's ball, confirming that it is PSK. The circular logic works out in this case, but it still really needs to be cleaned up.