![]() |
|
|||
Quote:
When R muffs a scrimmage kick beyond the LOS, the team in possession at the end of the down will get a new series (5-1-3f). This is the provision that leads some to think that K should get the ball after the second kick. However, the purpose of this kind of scrimmage kick is to initiate a change of possession. That's still true for the second kick. And the second kick is legal: no rule prohibits a second kick (compare the forward pass rule), the ball is not dead when K recovers a kick behind the NZ (6-2-3), and during any down a team may legally perform a scrimmage kick before team possession has changed (6-2-1). A second legal kick need not betray an ignorance of the rules: if R blocks the kick and never touches it beyond the NZ, a second kick is not a bad idea. But on this play K would have had a new series after recovering a kick that R muffed beyond the NZ, and in most cases they should just keep the ball. If NFHS had given K the ball in this play, that ruling would reward ignorance. I think that the reported ruling is right on the money.
__________________
Cheers, mb |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Muffed Punt - TD? | bossman72 | Football | 7 | Thu Oct 23, 2008 07:27am |
Muffed Punt on 3rd down | gtwbam | Football | 3 | Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:17am |
MNF: Muffed punt | tpaul | Football | 4 | Tue Oct 11, 2005 07:15am |
Punt muffed in own end zone (NFL) | coogrfan | Football | 9 | Fri Aug 12, 2005 03:06am |