First touching
 

6-2-5 states (in part): "The right of R to take the ball at [the] spot of first
touching by K is canceled if R touches the kick and thereafter during the down
commits a foul or if the penalty is accepted for any foul committed during the down."

This claim is ambiguous. It could mean:
(1) R forfeits the right to the SPOT when they foul, or
(2) R forfeits the right to the BALL and the spot when they foul.

I was taught that (1) is correct: once K commits first touching, R will be next to put the ball in play, no matter what. First touching is a violation, and the "penalty" is to give the ball to R, usually at the spot of first touching.

The only reason R would NOT get the ball at that spot is that some other penalty is enforced (or R takes the result of the play, thus effectively "declining" the "penalty" for first touching). And that's exactly what I read in 6-2-5.

So if during a scrimmage kick K commits first touching, then R recovers the kick, then R fouls, then R fumbles, and K recovers, we should have a non-PSK foul by R, but R keeps the ball because of the first touching. There's no double foul because K has not fouled (only violated); so R keeps the right to the ball even though they lose the right to the spot of first touching.

In that case: what's the basic spot? We enforce the penalty for R's foul from the basic spot under all but one, right? Another version of the case puts R's foul before R's recovery: then the correct interpretation of 6-2-5 will determine whether the foul is a PSK foul.

And: does anyone defend interpretation (2) above, or have I been taught correctly?

Could it be you're reading too much into this? As noted, 6-5-2 says, "The right of R to take the ball at the spot of firect touching by K is canceled if R touches the kick and thereafter during the down commits a foul or if the penalty is accepted for any foul committed during the down."

K, by commiting a First Touching violation, creates a right by R to take possession of the ball at the spot of First Touching. If (when) R subsequently commits a fould during the down, or any foul by either team is accepted the right to that possession at that spot is "cancelled", i.e. eliminated, so possession and location will be determined by the subsequent action because the special right granted by the First touching ceases to exist.

Both the right to the ball, and the location are granted by the First touching violation, when that right is cancelled NEITHER continue.

I certainly subscribe to interpretation #2. I just ran the play from the NFHS forum by our local interpreter - he agrees that 6-2-5 means that the receiving team loses the automatic right to the ball. I have nothing from any higher authority, though.

Not sure who taught you 1 ... 2 is correct.

#2 correct by me

I'm with the ones who believe #2 is correct. I can't find anywhere in the rules relating to first touching where it delineates between the right to keep the ball and the right to the spot of the ball. Thus the statement "the right of R to take the ball at the spot of first touching by K is canceled..." to me means that the entire right is canceled and thus R no longer has the choice.

So K legally possesses the ball per 6-2-4 and I would award a new series per 5-1-3d. K would decline the foul by R since accepting would leave R in possession. First-and-10 for K at the spot of recovery.