Drop kick for kickoff

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by glyphrunner

I definitely see your point on this, and I think I would call it a FKI. Playing devil's advocate, though, I will submit the following:

Rule 6-1-2: "Once designated, K must kick from that spot."
It does not say anything about the ball being moved, and if you stop the video at the point of contact for the kick, he is actually kicking the ball right at the original kicking tee. So, we could say K kicked the ball from the designated spot.

I've read that argument and don't buy it. The spot is on the tee, on the ground. That's the spot he designated when he tee'd up. Drop kicking it is not kicking it from the tee where he spotted it.

Further, as Robert said, when the player who doesn't kick the ball touches it, he has also committed a refraction.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I've read that argument and don't buy it. The spot is on the tee, on the ground. That's the spot he designated when he tee'd up. Drop kicking it is not kicking it from the tee where he spotted it.

Further, as Robert said, when the player who doesn't kick the ball touches it, he has also committed a refraction.

That's not what I meant. At the time the ball was kicked, the player who passed the ball to him looked like he was ahead of the ball.

[With_Two_Flakes]

If it is considered that this play might be legal (ignoring the possible offside by the kid who starts it off), then perhaps we should take it to its absurd conclusion. How much of this messing about with throwing the ball from player to player WOULD be allowable? Would it be allowed to be thrown backwards by A1 to A2, then forwards by A2 to A3 and then kicked? What if there were two forward "passes"? What if it was batted to the eventual kicker?
Would the only consideration be to kill the play if they exceeded the 25 second count?

I'm not a Fed Rules expert, we use NCAA over here in Europe. I can't find a specific rule in my 2010 Fed book (or indeed in my NCAA book) that I could say specifically outlaws this play. But for me, common sense deems it illegal. My gut feeling is that once the ball is blown ready, if they want to drop kick it then the kid who kicks it better be the only one who handles it. But I have no rule reference to back that up.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by With_Two_Flakes

If it is considered that this play might be legal (ignoring the possible offside by the kid who starts it off), then perhaps we should take it to its absurd conclusion. How much of this messing about with throwing the ball from player to player WOULD be allowable? Would it be allowed to be thrown backwards by A1 to A2, then forwards by A2 to A3 and then kicked? What if there were two forward "passes"? What if it was batted to the eventual kicker?

The ball is dead until it's kicked, and any amount or type of handling it prior to that is legal. Same if they want to polish it, pray to it, etc.

Would the only consideration be to kill the play if they exceeded the 25 second count?

Yes. It's like a drop-out in Rugby Union, where teams sometimes do pass the ball around to find an opening, subject only to the referee's decision that they're delaying the game.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

The ball is dead until it's kicked, and any amount or type of handling it prior to that is legal. Same if they want to polish it, pray to it, etc.

Citation? The snapper cannot handle the (dead) ball prior to snapping it in just any manner he wishes.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Citation? The snapper cannot handle the (dead) ball prior to snapping it in just any manner he wishes.

What's that Latin phrase that translates as something like, "The mention of one works to the omission of the other"?

There are rules regarding motion of the ball prior to the snap. There's a rule regarding choosing the spot of the ball for a place kick used as a free kick. The rules makers know how to write restrictions, so why isn't it enough for you that their silence on this matter means there's no restriction?

[MD Longhorn]

I THINK (but am not 100% convinced) that a drop kick for a free kick would generally be legal... what made this one illegal was the selection of a spot on the tee, then the movement from that spot and not kicking it from that spot (close... but not THAT spot, right on the tee).

[InsideTheStripe]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

What's that Latin phrase that translates as something like, "The mention of one works to the omission of the other"?

There are rules regarding motion of the ball prior to the snap. There's a rule regarding choosing the spot of the ball for a place kick used as a free kick. The rules makers know how to write restrictions, so why isn't it enough for you that their silence on this matter means there's no restriction?

Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

There's a rule regarding choosing the spot of the ball for a place kick used as a free kick. The rules makers know how to write restrictions, so why isn't it enough for you that their silence on this matter means there's no restriction?

But there is a restriction. The kicker may cross the neutral zone when he kicks the ball, but otherwise no encroachment is permitted during a free kick. To pick up the ball would constitute encroachment.

Your ignoring this restriction does not render it silent.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I've read that argument and don't buy it. The spot is on the tee, on the ground. That's the spot he designated when he tee'd up. Drop kicking it is not kicking it from the tee where he spotted it.

Further, as Robert said, when the player who doesn't kick the ball touches it, he has also committed a refraction.

Devil's advocate: can a team not change their mind about using a tee after the RFP or some other delineating point?

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Further, as Robert said, when the player who doesn't kick the ball touches it, he has also committed a refraction.

Rule reference, please.