Case Book Question

[Sonofanump]

I have always had a problem with this exact play. (in therory not ever on the field)

I think the rules provide for a previous spot enforcement.

Philosophically, it makes too much sense not to enforce it as PSK from the dead ball spot.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: This play has an asterisk in front of it, indicating that it is a change since last season. In last season's case book, the ruling was to penalize from the previous spot. Now in 2008, with a clarification to the PSK criteria, one that the Fed calls an editorial change, and a mostly insignificanrewording of the IW procedures, I can't understand what caused the change the the 4.2.3 ruling.

After all, as Tom pointed out, absent the foul, who would next be entitled to put the ball in play? It would be K because of the IW. If the Fed wants it different, they better find a way to get the rules to coincide with that desire.

[Mike L]

What I think the NFHS has intended (and yes, this is guessing) is the IW has created a dead ball spot much like if the kick had just rolled dead with no-one attempting to touch it.
Like Bob said, if this is what they want, it would be nice if it was clearly spelled out in the rules.

[mbyron]

What's the "god rule" in football -- you know, the one that gives officials the power to rule on anything not specifically covered in the rules?

[Bob M.]

REPLY: The problem, mbyron, is that it is covered in both the rule book and in the case book. But the rule book ruling would conflict with the case book ruling. And the Fed has no precedence statement to tell you what book rules when there's a conflict.

[OverAndBack]

I'd say (just IMHO) that the rules book would have precedence. The case book seems to me to just be a supplemental guide to help you understand the rules book's practical applications.

Cliff's Notes for the New Testament, rather than The Gospel itself, to make an analogy.

[GPC2]

The President of my local association has stated that this foul would be either penalized from the spot of the foul, or replay the down (K's option obviously).

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by OverAndBack

Cliff's Notes for the New Testament, rather than The Gospel itself, to make an analogy.

REPLY: Except that the NF Rule Book and Case Book have the same author...unlike the Cliff Notes and the New Testament

[ODJ]

The point of PSK enforcement is R has possession, which R doesn't when whistle is blown. Ball is still in motion: kick hasn't ended. I got PS unless NF has more clarification somewhere.

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by Mike L

...Like Bob said, if this is what they want, it would be nice if it was clearly spelled out in the rules.

REPLY: ...and clearly spelled out exactly how they expect us to officiate it. If the kick is in-flight when the IW is blown, exactly how do we determine the PSK spot ???

I agree with the esteemed Mr. Heisey

[MRH]

Our state rep contacted the NFHS. The ruling in this situation is wrong. Per NFHS - this entire casebook play should be crossed out.

[GPC2]

Originally Posted by MRH

Our state rep contacted the NFHS. The ruling in this situation is wrong. Per NFHS - this entire casebook play should be crossed out.

So I guess that means they still are deciding how this particular play should be handled. While that's all well and good in theory, how should we enforce this penalty in practice?

I personally will be following the lead of my president and giving K the option of enforcing the penalty at the spot of the foul (R's ball) or replaying the down.

BUT, hopefully we will never run into this situation.

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by GPC2

...and giving K the option of enforcing the penalty at the spot of the foul (R's ball)...

REPLY: Regardless of where the kick ended??? So if R pushed K in the back at R's 40 and the kick was rolling at R's 15 when the IW sounded, your association president is saying to enforce from R's 40 ?? That isn't even PSK.

[Mike L]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: ...and clearly spelled out exactly how they expect us to officiate it. If the kick is in-flight when the IW is blown, exactly how do we determine the PSK spot ???

I'm guessing at the NFHS thought process (such as it is), but I would venture we have to take a WAG.

You're correct: "The point of the PSK EXCEPTION is to GIVE R possession" but only if certain criteria are met. And one of those criteria is the "K will not be next to put the ball in play." Since there was an IW during a legal kick, who will next put the ball in play?

Again, I'm guessing at the NFHS thought process, K gets a choice. Enforce the penalty as per PSK, or decline the penalty and get a do over on the down.

Aaaah, it would be nice if they could at least attempt to take the guess work out of rule enforcement, huh?