![]() |
|
|
|||
So every time a team has a back at least 7 yds from the line of scrimmage it's obvious that it's a kicking situation? Or, do we have to look at down and distance...or...time of the game...or... time left in the half...or... if they have passed in this situation earlier in the game...or...if they have used the fake punt before...or...
|
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Tom |
|
|||
It's not just you. It's just some people insist on making a simple observation impossible to comprehend.
__________________
Indecision may or may not be my problem |
|
|||
Quote:
Obvious is obvious, and it's obvious some guys just like to argue for the sake of arguing.
__________________
I got a fever! And the only prescription.. is more cowbell! |
|
|||
OK, you want to leave the judgement in this call? At least take it out of the officials' heads. Call it a scrimmage kick formation based on whether team B has someone deep to receive. Won't work for all scrimmage kick situations, of course, as when a short field goal is anticipated, but then you could say the numbering exception isn't needed when team A doesn't have much ground to cover afer the kick.
How about it? Leave it to team B instead of team A? You drop a deep receiver back, you allow the other team the numbering exception. The rule would have to tolerate situations where team B shifted to draw an illegal formation foul on A, by giving team A a pass in such situations. You'd have to allow a late substitution by A when B showed their scrimmage kick formation, so they could get their eligible numbers in, and then they'd still be allowed if B shifted out of it before play began or was prevented. So there'd be a bit of a special substitution procedure. Robert |
|
|||
That wouldn't work. Sometimes B won't drop anyone back in an all out attempt to block the kick. Hey wait a minute, that would mean it's obvious that A is going to kick.
__________________
Tom |
|
|||
Quote:
![]() ![]() |
|
|||
Maybe all this worrying by some over officials ability to grasp a simple concept of "obvious" can be relieved if the rule is changed to read that the numbering exception is allowed in a SKC when a kick may be obvious "or a legal kick does occur". Then all this concern about SK's in those extremely rare situations that we might all see 2 or 3 times in our careers will not be penalized because a kick actually happened. I would think it would be obvious
![]()
__________________
Indecision may or may not be my problem |
|
|||
I know that the Illinois rep to the NF rules comm.will request that the wording on the exception read that it applies only on 4th down.
I officiated two varsity games this year where the A-11 was attempted for most of the game. To me, it reminded me of when I played HS football and you were eligible only by position---numbering was not a part of the rules then. Then football was "modernize" to follow the college numbering rules on eligibility. When I played, the defense had to understand the positioning and had to adapt on every play and the offense had to be clearly in an eligible position not this tight positioning, close to the LOS by backs that we see now. But, football was modernize, eligible numbering was brought in and I assume the committee will feel there should be no going back by taking advantage of an exception that was really brought in to eliminate the need to change jerseys or put on aprons with ineligible numbers. Remember when players used to slip on aprons over their regular jerseys so they could go in in place of a big heavy for punt coverage? That is why the exception was put in. |
|
|||
If they're not dropping anyone back, then team A doesn't need the speedy guys in coverage, hence no numbering exception. What's wrong with that?
|
|
|||
2 things. Who is long snapping and A is going to want to be the first on the ball to down it as deeply down the field as possible.
__________________
Tom |
|
|||
Quote:
And as far as kick coverage goes when the defense is rushing everybody, even the slow players will beat the defense peeling back if they don't block the kick. As soon as you lose your block, you release. They're still running one way while you're running the other. Robert |
|
|||
Quote:
A sends substitutes on 4th down to punt. B doesn't "drop anyone back" to cause A to foul. B thinks that A may fake the punt so they stay in their normal defense and doesn't "drop anyone back". Is that a foul? What constitutes "dropping back"? You have to realize that when it is everyone against you (and that everyone includes the NCAA) that maybe you are wrong. This is easy to officiate. Teams never punt on 1st, 2nd, or 3rd down. If a team is going to kick a field goal then a holder will be kneeling on the ground. No one ever drop kicks. Everyone knows when it is a kicking situation. Don't pretend that you can't determine if the team is going to attempt a kick or not. |
|
|||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
BTW, I saw one HS game on TV in the NYC area where one team ran a good deal of its offense from a long punt formation, either shifting into it or coming out in it straight from the huddle. Sometimes they even punted from it, and not always on 4th down. Quote:
Quote:
Robert |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Tags |
fat lady is singing, hello kettle!, hyena love |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
New 2009 BRD Questions | SAump | Baseball | 18 | Wed Dec 31, 2008 01:08am |
2008 - 2009 Rules Interps Situation 6 | mdray | Basketball | 4 | Fri Oct 31, 2008 02:11pm |
NFHS Rules Changes 2009 (Sort of) | Tim C | Baseball | 29 | Thu Jul 03, 2008 09:25am |