Punt Near Endzone

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Mike L

Rut,

as a teacher, I think you better review this statement of yours:

"For the record, the spot of first touching would be the 1 (which is the only place you have a bean bag). The dead ball spot would be wherever the kick ended or the play was over (receivers taking the ball and running). The other touches in your case are not relevant unless these are the places the ball is ruled dead".

Specifically rule 6-2-5

I do not need to review anything I said. There are going to be two spots that are important. We are going to put the ball at the spot of first touching or the dead ball spot. One of the spots is going to be in front of the other. We are going to bean bag the spot of first touching and if we have to determine another spot we do that.

I do not know how many here are Back Judges, but I doubt or have never seen one bean back 5 different spots. You bean bag one and you put the ball at the furthest most point if the kick ends without a return. The same thing on a free kick. You bean bag the spot of first touching in the neutral zone and then you keep officiating. Then whatever is the most advantageous spot is what we are going to put the ball. That is what I am looking for (which was the question) and let my Referee know what is that spot or if the ball is behind the spot.

I think this conversation is asinine. It is silly beyond belief because I would bet that most individuals have not worked the Back Judge position at the level I have and had to make these decisions on a regular basis as I have. Many here are making it complicated by trying to split hairs which the spot is. In almost all the situations that take place the K team touches the ball they are not trying to bat the ball all over the place. If the ball goes toward R's goal they are going to try to keep it going towards that goal. If the ball goes back toward K's goal line K is likely to possess the ball and if they don't it will be pretty obvious where we are going to put the ball.

Is this really that hard?

Peace

[golfnref]

He is slowly seeing the light but not admitting it. Obviously he subscribes to the premise that a good offense is a good defense or vice versa. If all else fails, dazzle them with footwork.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by golfnref

He is slowly seeing the light but not admitting it. Obviously he subscribes to the premise that a good offense is a good defense or vice versa. If all else fails, dazzle them with footwork.

Whatever man. I have been doing this a long time and my work on the field speaks for itself. I am sorry I am not overly technical like some here and likely can only prove it on here and not on the field. Thanks for the laugh!!!

I did not lose a single game or position by what those want to think as we are having this conversation.

Peace

[bisonlj]

JRut...I think the issue here is when given the scenario with K first touching the ball the R1 then the R4 and finally possessing it at the R2, you said R's options were the R1 and R2. Based on your last comment, do you now agree their options are the R1, R2, and R4 and they will obviously take the R4? This could easily happen if a K player tries to bat it back toward their goal line at the R1 and then in an attempt to possess the ball another K players muffs it at the R4 and eventually possesses it at the R2. This isn't K "batting the ball all over the place".

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

JRut...I think the issue here is when given the scenario with K first touching the ball the R1 then the R4 and finally possessing it at the R2, you said R's options were the R1 and R2. Based on your last comment, do you now agree their options are the R1, R2, and R4 and they will obviously take the R4? This could easily happen if a K player tries to bat it back toward their goal line at the R1 and then in an attempt to possess the ball another K players muffs it at the R4 and eventually possesses it at the R2. This isn't K "batting the ball all over the place".

I really do not care anymore. It is your issue, not mine.

I have a dead ball spot and a first touching spot. I am only marking first touching once with a bean bag (as a Back Judge and only having so many bean bags to begin with) and the ball will be place at one spot or the other in most case. If you need someone to give you all the possibilities, then you either do not know how to read the rules (because there are many rules with exceptions and different situations that apply) then I do not know what to tell you. And still the OPer has not said they had a problem understanding what they asked.

Peace

[asdf]

Anyone ever see the episode on Happy Days where The Fonz was uttering.....


"I was wrrrrrrrrrrruuunnnn.... I was wwrruuunnnnnnn....." ????

He just couldn''t bring himself to admit it.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not need to review anything I said. There are going to be two spots that are important. We are going to put the ball at the spot of first touching or the dead ball spot. One of the spots is going to be in front of the other. We are going to bean bag the spot of first touching and if we have to determine another spot we do that.

Jeff, you really need to review this rule and mechanic. Every spot of first touching is relevant and needs to be bagged. This is the very reason for the mechanics change several years ago requiring BJs to carry more than 1 bean bag.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Jeff, you really need to review this rule and mechanic. Every spot of first touching is relevant and needs to be bagged. This is the very reason for the mechanics change several years ago requiring BJs to carry more than 1 bean bag.

I do not need to review anything. I am marking two spots. One for first touching and one for the end of the kick. And I carry more than one bean bag (but like usual you probably did not understand that either) and only one first touching spot matters and one end of the kick spot matters. And as it relates to the first touching spot, we are still only marking one of them. Why, because the spot was either in front or behind the ball.

I personally carry three bean bags, but most people here claim they only carry two (if you read and pay attention to this board). So I guess marking multiple spots is going to be difficult for most people as we must mark 5 different first touching spots according to you.

Peace

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not need to review anything. I am marking two spots. One for first touching and one for the end of the kick. And I carry more than one bean bag (but like usual you probably did not understand that either) and only one first touching spot matters and one end of the kick spot matters. And as it relates to the first touching spot, we are still only marking one of them. Why, because the spot was either in front or behind the ball.

I personally carry three bean bags, but most people here claim they only carry two (if you read and pay attention to this board). So I guess marking multiple spots is going to be difficult for most people as we must mark 5 different first touching spots according to you.

Peace

Jeff, I did not attack you. I did not insult you. I've always treated you with respect. I expect the same respect in return.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but when you say you're only marking 2 spots it makes it difficult to comprehend.

Assume a punt is grounded at R's 10. K1 bats the ball at R's 2. The batted ball hits K2 at R's 8. The ball rolls out of bounds at R's 4.

Can you tell me where you're dropping your bean bags and what options are offered to R?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Assume a punt is grounded at R's 10. K1 bats the ball at R's 2. The batted ball hits K2 at R's 8. The ball rolls out of bounds at R's 4.

Can you tell me where you're dropping your bean bags and what options are offered to R?

Why are we still trying to wrestle this greased pig? He WILL NOT answer your question because he knows he was blatantly wrong. He will respond to your question with something like, "Walt - how can you not know the answer to this." followed by an insult to you, a bit of ego-bluster or resume-spewing, and a comment that he doesn't have to help you understand what you couldn't possibly understand. He'll probably yell at you for not knowing the 10 is irrelevant even though you never said it was.

HE KNOWS HE WAS WRONG. That is why he won't answer this directly. He's simply sitting in his mother's basement, getting excited about how much he's stirred things up. Thus, Jeff has landed in troll-landia.

This teaches me who I should and should not ask when requesting enlightenment regarding FED rules.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Why are we still trying to wrestle this greased pig? He WILL NOT answer your question because he knows he was blatantly wrong. He will respond to your question with something like, "Walt - how can you not know the answer to this." followed by an insult to you, a bit of ego-bluster or resume-spewing, and a comment that he doesn't have to help you understand what you couldn't possibly understand. He'll probably yell at you for not knowing the 10 is irrelevant even though you never said it was.

HE KNOWS HE WAS WRONG. That is why he won't answer this directly. He's simply sitting in his mother's basement, getting excited about how much he's stirred things up. Thus, Jeff has landed in troll-landia.

This teaches me who I should and should not ask when requesting enlightenment regarding FED rules.

JRut is actually very knowledgable about Fed rules so I would say he's someone you could rely on most of the time. He either firmly believes the subsequent touching by K are not spots of first touching or he is afraid to admit he was originally mistaken. I don't care which it is.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

JRut is actually very knowledgable about Fed rules so I would say he's someone you could rely on most of the time.

I believe that ... which is exactly why I asked him to clarify something that seemed off to me - and got ridiculed for it. And then when other Fedlandians pipe in, I learn he was exactly wrong about the thing that felt wrong to me. And I got resume-beaten and ridiculed some more. Why would I go back for more of that?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

He WILL NOT answer your question because he knows he was blatantly wrong. He will respond to your question with something like, "Walt - how can you not know the answer to this." followed by an insult to you, a bit of ego-bluster or resume-spewing, and a comment that he doesn't have to help you understand what you couldn't possibly understand. He'll probably yell at you for not knowing the 10 is irrelevant even though you never said it was.

HE KNOWS HE WAS WRONG. That is why he won't answer this directly. He's simply sitting in his mother's basement, getting excited about how much he's stirred things up. Thus, Jeff has landed in troll-landia.

This teaches me who I should and should not ask when requesting enlightenment regarding FED rules.

I will not answer your questions because I answered it a long time ago and I do not have to. You do you think you are Ron O'Neal or something?

Peace

[Canned Heat]

Not that this even applies here, but this is the kind of crap that kept me off of here for over a year. I led off a discussion about black pants two years ago and got lambasted about how dumb they were...yada yada. Now half the officials before too long here will be wearing them in lousy weather or cold conditions soon.

Guys come here for some discussion on things they've seen and dealt with and it turns into a pi$$ing match because an ego or two get chapped. For the sake of an argument...I'd bet almost anyone here working longer than a few years could watch the rest of us work and take up some sort of issue on their hustle, mechanics, positions at the snap, etc.

You guys sound like a bunch of ladies *****ing at each other on The View.

As we've all seen, having a ton of years in as an official does make a great official. Tooting your own horn about how good you are is classic....if you were that good you wouldn't be on here. You'd be on your way to wherever you're working this weekend.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Canned Heat

Not that this even applies here, but this is the kind of crap that kept me off of here for over a year. I led off a discussion about black pants two years ago and got lambasted about how dumb they were...yada yada. Now half the officials before too long here will be wearing them in lousy weather or cold conditions soon.

Guys come here for some discussion on things they've seen and dealt with and it turns into a pi$$ing match because an ego or two get chapped. For the sake of an argument...I'd bet almost anyone here working longer than a few years could watch the rest of us work and take up some sort of issue on their hustle, mechanics, positions at the snap, etc.

You guys sound like a bunch of ladies *****ing at each other on The View.

As we've all seen, having a ton of years in as an official does make a great official. Tooting your own horn about how good you are is classic....if you were that good you wouldn't be on here. You'd be on your way to wherever you're working this weekend.

I discuss these things like I discuss politics. They are fun and interesting, but never changes the core feelings I have as those are developed in other ways. If you come here looking to get something more out of this place from people you will never meet and people you will never work with, you are doing yourself a disservice in my opinion. There should be trainings and meetings in your area that should shape your feelings on anything. After all, the local people you will have to work for and deal with on a daily basis. I come here strictly for entertainment, no other reason. Those reason were dispelled a very long time ago.

Peace