Punt Near Endzone

[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?

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

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?

REPLY: mbcrowder, just for the record and as most others have said, the Fed "first touching" rules are virtually identical to the NCAA "illegal touching" rules that you know with one exception regarding how R's first/illegal touching rights can be cancelled. But yes...any and all spots where K touches a scrimmage kick prior to R touching are indeed "relevant" and each may become the succeeding spot--just like in NCAA. Whether you mark them with bean bags, hats, shoes, or jock straps, you better know which is the most advantageous to R once the play ends. Any idea that only the initial first/illegal touching spot and the dead ball spot are relevant and only one of those two spots will qualify as the succeeding spot is pure hogwash.

I haven't visited this board since June, and probably wouldn't have tuned in tonight either except that posters on another board told me I just had to read this if I wanted a good laugh before going to bed. This thread reminds me once again why I've stayed away. Now I'm certain I'll be ridiculed and insulted for this post, and I just hope that whoever might choose to do that asks to compare FB resumes with me.