Legacy,
We may not need any ARs, but none of us have seen the final rule language, so we don't know precisely what it will say. I've been around long enough to have seen some rule changes that morphed from leaning one way prior to publishing, to leaning quite a different way when published. I'm not saying anything will change here, but, remember, these rules are initiated by coaches/ADs/administrators, who don't know rule language like we do. So when they asked the Sec-Ed to draft a rule to allow the receiving team to get the ball at the 25 after a FC on a F/K inside the 25, they may not have understood that a "fair catch" requires a valid signal. They may have intended to include any catch after any signal (valid or invalid), but just didn't know to express it that way. Perhaps they have now, or will, get that understanding, and direct the Sec-Ed to change it to include any catch after a signal. Perhaps not. They may fully understand that this rule requires a valid signal, and that is what they truly want. But, I don't think anyone wants to be the guy, in week one, that rules an invalid signal, and makes Team B take over at the B-20, when they are expecting to get it at the B-25, without getting a full explanation of the rule change, preferably in writing from the Sec-Ed or National Coordinator.
In the days of Nelson and Adams, we could be certain that the rule language meant exactly what it said, when we first saw it, because we didn't usually see the changes until we got the books. ( Quite honestly, they were a bit better at writing tighter, more concise rules than Redding or Shaw, as good of people as they are. This is a great example, because they consistently use the term "kickoff" in correspondence, when, in fact, they mean "free kick" (a kickoff is one type of free kick, and the rule applies to all free kicks). Nelson and Adams would have been more careful about that.) With instant communication today, circumstances are different. We get early versions of the rule changes, that tend to get edited by the time the final version is released in the book.
Not everyone is able to attend national meetings (referees, replay, etc.), and we aren't directly privy to the discussions in those meetings. During my days in FBS, I tried to share as much of that information as possible, via forums such as this. I hope others will pick up that banner.
The problem with this rule is the valid signal. Until now, an invalid signal rarely caused a problem. The receiver intended to make a fair catch, but just gave a crappy signal. The kicking team saw the signal, as bad as it was, and let him catch the ball; he caught it; the officials stopped the play, and everyone went on satisfied. In recent years, signals have become worse and worse. I almost NEVER see a valid signal. They tend to throw their arm up in front of their face, wipe it over to their side, and then catch the ball. That is not "more than once." But, since kicking team players let them make the catch, no harm, no foul, and they don't get any better.
Fortunately, it has been unusual-to-rare to get a kicking team player to contact a receiver after any signal - valid or invalid. You might get KCI, but rarely contact with the receiver after the catch. So, we didn't have to explain to Coach B that his player wasn't protected from getting tackled because he gave a crappy signal.
But, now, if the receiver gives a crappy signal, they won't get the benefit of this new rule. Here is what will happen: Receivers will give crappy signals, and officials will rule an invalid signal, and award the ball to B at that spot, and Team B will be furious. Easy for us to say that players just need to learn to give better signals, but the officials are gonna look like the bad guys on this thing. Or, the officials will accept bad signals as valid (either unilaterally, or upon direction from their coordinators).
Having said all of that, this is another rule that will be very unusual to even see used. Most FCs on F/Ks are outside the B-25 (pooch kicks). Otherwise, receivers are rarely faced with a kicking team player threatening to tackle them immediately upon catching the ball on F/Ks. Even on a F/K after a safety, when the ball is punted, the kicking team players can't rush downfield before the kick, and a punt from the A-20 that lands inside the B-25 in flight (heckuva kick) just won't give them time to get to the receiver that quickly.
But, it would be nice for the "masses" to get a bulletin that explains that, indeed, they seriously mean a "fair catch," as defined, and the coaches know this.
Robert
