Free Kick Play
 

NFHS Rules.

During a kickoff, K1 is forced out of bounds by R1 at the 50. While still out of bounds and attempting to re-enter the field of play, K1 is contacted by R2 at the R45. After the contact, K1 stays out of bounds and re-enters the playing field at the R30. What do you have?

Thanks!

Scott

No problem ... K1 was blocked/forced out

Still no problem on K, he is attempting to re-enter at his first opportunity. Play does not state that R went out of bounds to block K, so no foul on R

Oops, from the R45 to the R30 and the play states "K1 stays OB". That does not sound like first opportunity ... Illegal Participation on K1 when he returns inbounds at the R30.

Enforcement depends of the status of the ball when K1 returned inbounds (9-6-1).

I believe you're saying that enforcement will depend on whether the foul occurs before or after R gains possession (whether the kick has ended). The basic spot will be the previous spot for the former (loose ball play), or the end of the run for the latter (running play).

But I would add that whether you have a foul also depends on a different status of the ball when K1 returned to the field. If the ball was dead, he couldn't have participated.

It's also worth remembering that, although the spot of the foul in this case is where K1 re-entered the field, the foul is for participating, not merely re-entering.

Just some clarification...

R2 did contact K1 out of bounds, before he could return.

When K1 did return to the field of play, R3 had possession of the ball and the play was still live.

The reason I am asking is that I had this play happen to me and I am wondering if I got it right.

What did K1 do after returning to the field? Where was R2 when the contact occurred?

K1 came back into the field of play, but really didn't have an impact on the play.

R2 was a step out of bounds and K1 was fully out of bounds when the contact occurred.

I've got 15 on R, nothing on K.

Under NFHS? For what? No rule -- or at least no provision of 9-4 -- prohibits R from blocking K in this case.

Indeed, if you're going to flag R here, you MUST flag K, since K is clearly participating by occupying a blocker!

And, as a game management issue: if K1 has run 15 yds downfield and OOB in order to get in on this play, I'm not flagging R for a hit that's 6 inches OOB and getting K off the hook for IP.

Careful here. If you mean he didn't tackle the runner, then there's more to "have an impact" than you're thinking.

If the K player occupies a blocker, then his illegal act has affected the play and gained K an advantage. That's illegal participation, and it needs to be flagged.

I get that many people don't like the NFHS rule here, but that's a separate issue.

Fair enough...to further clarify, R3 was tackled on the other side of the field away from K1. K1 did participate by re-entering the field.

This is part of what I am looking at. K was clearly out of bounds in the restricted area. When R2 made the block, he took a step into the restricted area and contacted K1. Does this justify a personal foul? Trying to find a good reference to support it.

As far as K1 goes, he ran right through the restricted area until he got to the R30 and then re-entered the playing field. He did not run through the bench area at all. To be honest, I don't believe K1 or R2 knew where the heck they were on the field.

No, it is not a PF. It is Illegal Participation
9-6-2 ... No player shall intentionally go out of bounds during the down and:
a. Return to the field;
b. Intentionally touch the ball;
c. Influence the play; or
d. Otherwise participate.


It does not matter if K1 made the tackle, chased the runner or was blocked by anyone. When K1 returned inbounds, he was guilty of Illegal Participation at the R30 because he did not "return at the first opportunity" (he ran 15 yards out of bounds).
9-6-1 . . . Prior to a change of possession, or when there is no change of possession, no player of A or K shall go out of bounds and return to the field during the down unless blocked out of bounds by an opponent. If a player is blocked out of bounds by an opponent and returns to the field during the down, he shall return at the first opportunity.

Double Foul, offset and replay the down.

This was how I called it, but I had a PF on R2 and IP on K1 and we re-kicked. Thanks for the rule reference. I guess it should have been IP on both R2 and K1. I appreciate the discussion!

Scott

Canadian Ruling
 

CANADIAN RULING:

No initial foul on K1 because he was blocked to out of bounds.

It sounds as though R2 was out of bounds illegally who then participated. Flag for Illegal Participation.

If K1 used the out of bounds area to his advantage, then I have Illegal Participation on him as well.

What? At this point, K is doing what he's allowed to do - trying to return to the field immediately after being blocked out of bounds. How in the world can K be flagged at this point in the play?

I see your point later in the play - after running 15 yards out of bounds, if he comes in and occupies a blocker, he could be flagged for IP (play going the other way is not enough to rule it out -- but if the play ended very shortly after K re-entered, I'd not flag it.

Sorry ... neglected to answer this part. If R left the field and blocked, then he's guilty of IP as well. 9-6, not 9-4.

This is what I was thinking of. But given this play, I'm not sure I agree with the rest of this sentence. By running 15 yards OOB and taking a blocker with him, he's definitely participating, even if the play ends shortly after he re-enters.

I just can't see flagging R here but giving K a pass, since K's illegal actions occasioned R's.

Yep, I see that now. I was looking at the provision of the IP rule that prohibits A/K from leaving the field (9-6-1 rather than 9-6-2), and addressing the idea that R hitting K OOB might be a PF (hence the reference to 9-4).

Not true. R's foul occurred significantly before anything K did illegally. K was blocked OOB, K tried to return, then R went out of bounds and participated by blocking. That should be flagged the moment he left the field of play and then blocked. You don't know (yet) that K is going to foul.

You may, or may not, still have a foul on K later in this play, either by participating in the actual play or as you described, occupying a blocker. However, I think you'd get some debate on the idea that K running out of bounds 15 yards occupied a blocker. The players are supposed to know the rules - if K doesn't return immediately, R should know to ignore him. I can see your side too though, especially with the K player running right in the restricted area - near enough to inbounds that R feels like he needs to stay with his man.

I hear this a lot when talking about IP, but its when he steps back on field the foul has occured, not only if he " does something"

Not if he stepped out intentionally (which would be rare). Then he's guilty of IP merely for participating.

Not sure what you are saying. If he intentionally steps out, you have a hat down, not a flag. If he doesnt re-enter field during the down, there is no foul

No, mere reentry is not IP. PARTICIPATING (at all) is required for illegal participation.

Imagine the play nearing it's end on the other sideline, our OOB WR walks back onto the field, or even jogs back on while heading to his own sideline --- if he is not involved in the play and no one from the other team reacts to him, he has not participated.

I would like to see NFHS clarify 9-6-1 and 9-6-2. The letter of the rule, especially 9-6-2, states that it's a foul to return to the field. "No player shall intentionally go out of bounds during the down and: (a) Return to the field."

However, the concept and philosophy of illegal participation is that merely stepping on the field, with nobody else around, is not participation and does not warrant a flag. Provided that one understands 'participation' broadly enough — not just catching a pass, but also occupying a blocker, for instance — it's reasonable to require the player who went OOB to participate before penalizing his team 15 yards for illegal PARTICIPATION.

Between that and the slippage about what constitutes "intentionally" going OOB, this rule needs some editorial revision. I'd be happy to consult, if you're reading this post, NFHS rules committee members. :)

OK, so if receiver A1 intentionally goes out of bounds, A2 catches ball, as A1 re-enters field, then blocks, where is the flag down? Where he re-enters or where he blocks? I agree with poster above, the foul occurs when he steps back onto the field, now what he does after that, unless that, is also illegal. I also get "philosophy" says we turn our head unless he "does something"...but what if that is 30 yards down the field?

Oh, that's easy. The spot of the foul is defined by rule as where he re-enters. 9-6-2

Exactly, then we have answered our question, the foul is where he re-enters the field during the down.