Drop kick for kickoff

[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.

[jchamp]

Originally Posted by mbyron

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.

K is also permitted a holder who may be in the neutral zone. If the holder were to stand over the ball and then toss it back for it to be used as a drop kick, would the holder then still be encroaching?

What if the holder tosses it back and then moves backwards to a point between the 40 and the drop kick location? Or to a point completely behind the ball and kicker? What if he does these things before the RFP? (This last one is obviously legal.)

I'm mentioning these because with as much press as these things get, it is just a matter of time before you find it happening in your own games. If you don't discuss them in your associations, and make clear what your enforcement will be until it's in the case book, you'll end up with Dwight Shrute on your sideline busting the play because "he thought" something that wasn't correct.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by jchamp

K is also permitted a holder who may be in the neutral zone. If the holder were to stand over the ball and then toss it back for it to be used as a drop kick, would the holder then still be encroaching?

I agree that these kicks need to be addressed. I also recognize the exception allowed for a holder to encroach without penalty.

However, a holder by definition holds the ball, and his permission to encroach covers only the holding of the ball: he may not be a runner or passer. So, no, I don't regard the play you reference as legal.

As I read the rule, once the ball is placed on a tee, the next legal touch by K must either be a hold or a kick. Intentionally removing the ball from the tee is not legal.

When NFHS revises rule 6 and makes these kicks either clearly legal or clearly illegal, or when I get definitive guidance from the state, I will be happy to conform to that rule or guidance.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by mbyron

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.

Only if putting it down to begin with is also!

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Only if putting it down to begin with is also!

Wrong again, as the neutral zone does not exist then.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Wrong again, as the neutral zone does not exist then.

Doesn't it exist as soon as the ball is ready for play?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Doesn't it exist as soon as the ball is ready for play?

Yes it does. But you asked whether it was encroachment while a player was setting the ball on the tee. And at that time the ball is NOT ready for play, and the NZ does not exist.

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Yes it does. But you asked whether it was encroachment while a player was setting the ball on the tee. And at that time the ball is NOT ready for play, and the NZ does not exist.

How do you know the ball isn't ready for play? The ball being on the tee has nothing to do with it being ready for play.