NFHS: wrong type of free kick

[Robert Goodman]

This arises from the "kick play" thread as a consequence of how Fed now defines kicks.

In NCAA the interpret'ns specifically say that if a disallowed type of kick is used for a free kick, or the ball is kicked from a side zone, the ball is allowed to become live, and it's treated as a foul as the ball becomes live. But what about Fed? Suppose K1 punts the ball when it's RFP via kickoff, or tries some funky technique that wouldn't produce a legal kick under any circumstance, such as rolling the ball on the ground and kicking it. Because of the way Fed now defines its kicks, neither would be a "free kick", so the ball would remain dead. But would you whistle immediately for "delay of game" because of this being "action which prevents promptness in putting the ball in play"? Or would you say the 25 sec. clock is still running, and allow team K to retrieve the ball if possible to do legally (say if it stayed on their side of the neutral zone, as a funky technique might very well result) and still put it in play legally? It would seem team R would be very likely to be induced to thinking the ball had been put in play whenever someone of K toes it, so a whistle for any excuse would seem prudent.

Does the case book have anything on this?

[maven]

Case book has nothing, as the probability of it happening is vanishingly small.

If I saw them setting up to do something weird, I'd kill it and fix it. If I couldn't prevent it, I'd flag DOG, explain the problem, and then flag the HC for UNS if they did it again.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: Never really thought of it, but the Fed rule book does address it implicitly, saying "A down is action which starts with a legal snap (beginning a
scrimmage down) or when the ball is kicked on a free kick (beginning a free-kick down)." So if they illegally kick the ball, it's not (by definition) the beginning of a down. So you can't let it just go on. One might point to the words "...or when the ball is kicked on a free kick..," and question this as a possible ambiguity. But a "free kick" is defined in such a way that it must be a legal kick. Question is...what would you do after you shut it down?

[ump33]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: Never really thought of it, but the Fed rule book does address it implicitly, saying "A down is action which starts with a legal snap (beginning a
scrimmage down) or when the ball is kicked on a free kick (beginning a free-kick down)." So if they illegally kick the ball, it's not (by definition) the beginning of a down. So you can't let it just go on. One might point to the words "...or when the ball is kicked on a free kick..," and question this as a possible ambiguity. But a "free kick" is defined in such a way that it must be a legal kick. Question is...what would you do after you shut it down?

I believe 2-24-3 defines a Legal Free Kick as is any legal kick that is used to put the ball in play. It does not state only a Legal Free Kick may put the ball in play.

Take a look at 2-24-9, it defines a Illegal Kick as kick that does not comply with 2-24-3. It also states if the ball is loose following an Illegal Kick, it is treated as a fumble. If the ball is loose and treated as a fumble, it must be live.

I think we flag it, let the play continue and enforce from the previous spot if accepted

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by ump33

I believe 2-24-3 defines a Legal Free Kick as is any legal kick that is used to put the ball in play. It does not state only a Legal Free Kick may put the ball in play.

Take a look at 2-24-9, it defines a Illegal Kick as kick that does not comply with 2-24-3. It also states if the ball is loose following an Illegal Kick, it is treated as a fumble. If the ball is loose and treated as a fumble, it must be live.

I think we flag it, let the play continue and enforce from the previous spot if accepted

You have a point.

But I think the real point is that Fed is overstuffing Rule 2, putting too many things into definitions when they'd really be more comfortably handled as substantive provisions. Rule 2 has gotten very big in recent decades compared to other numbered Rules. Definitions are useful only to save repetition; you can practically use a computer program to determine which phrases recur and could benefit from being condensed into technical terms. Fed & NCAA have gone way beyond that.

Take for instance Fed's 2-3, "Blocking". It suffers from lack of parallelism because it includes language which is actually substantive, regarding permissions & prohibitions, rather than definitive. Sorry, Fed, arts. 2 thru 6 do not belong there, they belong in Rule 9. Same with 2-17 arts. 2 thru 4.

[ajmc]

There are infinitely more things NOT covered by NFHS rules than are actually covered, which is likely why NF: 1-1-6 was initiated. Thankfully, or not, the NFHS rules makers seem to trust and rely on the common sense, fairness and judgment of game officials, particularly the Referee, and have placed this absolute authority exclusively in the hands of Referees. rather than any other source.

Rather than engage in a never ending speculation about hypothetical sistuation that may, or may never, materialize, 1-1-6 provides a consistent remedy for dealing with circumstances unanticipated by rule makers. Rule makes, and game officials realize and accept that, although achieving absolute perfection is a laudable objective, it is an elusive and unreachable objective. Given such ultimate authority is a serious responsibility, and when necessary to apply should be given serious consideration.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: Never really thought of it, but the Fed rule book does address it implicitly, saying "A down is action which starts with a legal snap (beginning a
scrimmage down) or when the ball is kicked on a free kick (beginning a free-kick down)." So if they illegally kick the ball, it's not (by definition) the beginning of a down. So you can't let it just go on.

That's non sequitur, depending on what you mean by "it". Seems a literal reading of the rules would simply be that the dead ball "goes on" as it had before the ball was kicked.

One might point to the words "...or when the ball is kicked on a free kick..," and question this as a possible ambiguity. But a "free kick" is defined in such a way that it must be a legal kick. Question is...what would you do after you shut it down?

I can't think of anything other than delay of game, for the reason I stated above: the likelihood that team B would think the ball was in play, therefore a delay caused by team A's action.