Free kick after a fair catch?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Theisey

Of course a play might have occurred.. unless we're talking a dead-ball encroachment.

It really doesn't make sense. Team-B could commit DPI, have a 15 yard-mark off against them, along with the another (for statictical purposes) a first down for Team-A and eight, nine or more seconds ticked off the clock. I'm not putting time back on the clock.. so a play did occur.

Nah... this really doesn't make sense. I'm for a change that eliminates the option to free kick on anything but a dead-ball foul against either teamm

I think I understand the logic of your complaint to where I can explain it a little better than you have so far.

A has the option of free kick or snap. They decide to snap, and during the down, B fouls. The nature of team B's play and their reason for fouling is entirely different from what would've occurred during a free kick down. So for instance, let's say it was DPI as in your example. No DPI could possibly have occurred had it been a free kick down instead of a scrimmage down. The penalty for DPI is meant to remedy a type of unfair play against forward passes. It's inequitable to then allow a free kick to be taken as a way of "repeating the down", when the conditions of the forward pass could not be duplicated.

Looking at it another way, once A first chose the scrimmage, they had no way to anticipate that B would commit a foul either before or during the down, and so they should not be allowed to benefit tactically by effectively deferring their choice of way to put the ball in play.

OTOH, the same could be said if A chose a free kick and then fouled either before or during the down -- that if the down was to be repeated, they should not be allowed to change the method of putting the ball into play to a snap, even if the original reason for the free kick choice was strongly dependent on field position.

Of course it would be right to say that no repetition of a down can ever recreate fully the conditions. Someone could argue that if DPI were called, a forward pass should be required on the next down, but of course that would distort the conditions even more than just allowing another snap. I got into a long argument with Scott Taylor about my "zeroth down" proposal for repeat-the-down penalties following CoP because we disagree over whether that or the current penalty administration comes closest to setting back the conditions to when the foul occurred.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I got into a long argument with Scott Taylor about my "zeroth down" proposal for repeat-the-down penalties following CoP because we disagree over whether that or the current penalty administration comes closest to setting back the conditions to when the foul occurred.

Ah, Scott Taylor. That brings back memories. As Scott passed away about 3 years ago, you won't be having that argument with him again. It was entertaining, though, as was Scott over on alt.sport.officiating (and when it all moved to rec.sport.officiating).

[ajmc]

There's a really simple remedy that totally eliminates any, and all, problems with this enforcement; don't commit defensive fouls on a down following a FC.

The current rule gives R a choice of putting the ball in play by snap, or free kick. B makes that choice based, partially, on field position. 99+% of the time B is going to choose putting the ball in play by snap. They run a play, during which they don't do anything wrong and because of some error on the part of the defense, are allowed to REPEAT the down.

Why should they lose the choice they had EARNED by making a Fair Catch? Of course, you might consider this happens, "once in a blue moon" adding a rare level of strategy for those who have taken the time to learn the rules of the game.

As for "harmonizing" the rules. If you want Canadian Football, I'm sure our neighbors to the North would welcome your visit, or if you want NCAA rules there are 2 States and countless colleges that will satisfy your needs. We also have NFL games in cities across the nation at your disposal.

Football rules began at the collegiate level and over the years have modified in one direction to accomodate younger athletes, and the other direction to accomodate adults. Both accomodations make sense for their respective audiences. Coaches should focus on the level they coach, not where they might have played, or watch on TV.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by ajmc

There's a really simple remedy that totally eliminates any, and all, problems with this enforcement; don't commit defensive fouls on a down following a FC.

Duh, there's an even simpler remedy: Don't play football.

As for "harmonizing" the rules. If you want Canadian Football, I'm sure our neighbors to the North would welcome your visit, or if you want NCAA rules there are 2 States and countless colleges that will satisfy your needs. We also have NFL games in cities across the nation at your disposal.

Football rules began at the collegiate level and over the years have modified in one direction to accomodate younger athletes, and the other direction to accomodate adults. Both accomodations make sense for their respective audiences. Coaches should focus on the level they coach, not where they might have played, or watch on TV.

I hope you understand that the harmoniz'n process I described involved consolidating the rules for the different types of free kicks and reducing their idiosyncracies within one code, not between codes.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Ah, Scott Taylor. That brings back memories. As Scott passed away about 3 years ago, you won't be having that argument with him again.

Last I'd heard, his diabetes was well managed, things seemed OK. What got him?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Last I'd heard, his diabetes was well managed, things seemed OK. What got him?

The big C, from what I heard, late in 2006. "The late Scott Taylor" is credited in the NFHS Redding Guide.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

The big C, from what I heard, late in 2006. "The late Scott Taylor" is credited in the NFHS Redding Guide.

Wow, cancer of what?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Wow, cancer of what?

I don't know. We weren't friends (I never met him), just Usenet acquaintances. I do remember asking him about a long absence and remember him saying "cancer sucks". I could very well be wrong as to the cause.

We sparred quite vigorously and went round and round and I miss that.