Barefoot kicker

[bbeagle]

Home team's only field goal kicker injured in first half. Home team goes for two on their one score, and misses. No other times home team needs a kicker in this game so far.... until at the last minute a player says he can kick the game winner....

Visitors (Team B) winning game 7-6. 4th quarter. :03 left, Home team (Team A) has the ball on the 10 yard line. 4th down. Clock stopped after incomplete pass.

Indecision on Team A's side of what to do, but Team A rushes and brings out their field goal unit with this player who is confident he can kick it.

Referees rush to get into position, do, the field goal is kicked through the uprights as time expires.

As Team A is celebrating (the clock reads :00).... officials are coming together and leaving the field (there is no football to hold overhead as the ball is way past the end zone - no nets). Team B's coach rushes the field and confronts the referee, 'The field goal kicker kicked it with his barefoot! You can't do that! He needs to wear shoes!'

Rule 1-5-f

How do you handle this situation?

[CalhounLJ]

If you didn’t see him kick it with his barefoot you can’t throw a flag for it. Same as seeing a mouthpiece dangling after the down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AlUpstateNY]

The Referee (as well as each of the other game officials) would observe a substitute (in this instance a kicker) enter the field WITHOUT satisfying the requirements of 1-5-f, an official TO would be declared, requiring compliance with NFHS 1-5-4, PRIOR to the kick being attempted. "

(if, unfortunately & highly improbably, the lack of required equipment was NOT observed and the play was completed as suggested, the Referee would have the opportunity to determine whether the situation would call for application of NFHS: 1-1-6, and what an appropriate remedy ("in the spirit of good sportsmanship") should prevail.

Presumably the Referee, as well as his crewmates, would have retained their usually keen observation responsibilities, exercised the proper protocols and avoided the necessity of the Referee having to address and deal with this unnecessary cluster****.

[CalhounLJ]

Let me throw this in there- what if the failure to wear required equipment was a mouthpiece? What would you do when/if the coach came running up to you and screamed his mouthpiece was dangling the whole time. He can’t do that. You look at the kicker and sho nuff the mouthpiece is dangling.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[prab]

Let me throw this in there- what if the failure to wear required equipment was a mouthpiece? What would you do when/if the coach came running up to you and screamed his mouthpiece was dangling the whole time. He can’t do that. You look at the kicker and sho nuff the mouthpiece is dangling.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think that this is an entirely different situation.  Mouthpiece could come out during the play.  If you didn't see it out before/during the play, it's too late.

However, I think that if you see a kicker, without a shoe after the kick, you can reasonably conclude that it didn't come off DURING the down. 

[CalhounLJ]

Ok fair enough. What if it was a shoulder pad sticking out of a jersey? Any difference then? Or pants over the knees?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ncwingman]

I don't think the exposed pads or knees are different from the mouthpiece -- they could all have been adjusted based on action during the play (or the celebration after the play).

I have to think that if we didn't see it until the opposing coach pointed it out after the play, then we didn't see it and can't call it. From a strict rules standpoint, I'm not sure what we can do if it was noticed during the live ball period (outside of invoking the God Clause, 1-1-6) -- you can't really throw a flag on the coach even, because Failure to Wear Required Equipment and Wearing Illegal Equipment are not the same thing. But even if you did flag the coach, it would be a nonplayer foul that wouldn't invoke replaying the down or extending the period.

[yarnnelg]

Look at it from this perspective. How often do you see a group of coaches screaming about a phantom block in the back? Then 10-15 seconds later the official drops the flag because they convinced him the block took place? Or reverse it and pick the flag up on his own?

Live by a rule: If you don't see it from start to finish it isn't a foul.

[CalhounLJ]

That is my point. If I’m on the field on Friday night and this play happens exactly as written, if I didn’t catch it during the play, I’m not letting him talk me into it after. I’ll just have to eat it and try to live with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AlUpstateNY]

Thankfully, that's why there's 4, 5, 6 or even 7 of us out there, so we can stay on a healthy diet.

[jwkde]

If  you notice it before the play, is it "illegal equipment"  or  "missing equipment"   

[CalhounLJ]

It is failure to wear required equipment.

[Ralph Damren]

Where failure to wear required equipment is no longer a penalty, I fail to see how we could replay the play. While using an illegal tee (9-10-4) requires previous spot enforcement, it would be a stretch to claim that kicking while barefoot gave the kicker an advantage.

[prab]

Where failure to wear required equipment is no longer a penalty, I fail to see how we could replay the play. While using an illegal tee (9-10-4) requires previous spot enforcement, it would be a stretch to claim that kicking while barefoot gave the kicker an advantage.

I realize that disagreeing with Ralph may not be a good career move.  However, I believe that we can infer that the kicker believed kicking while barefooted gave him an advantage.  If not, there doesn't seem to be any other rational explanation for why he did it that way. 

[CalhounLJ]

True but you could make the same argument if he or any other player have their pants pulled up above their knees. IMO, it doesn’t hold water.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AlUpstateNY]

If an observant Referee NEVER allows a scrimmage kick to
Be attempted without the REQUIRED shoe, there should
NEVER be a question about a re-kick.
 

[CalhounLJ]

This is true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KWH]

If an observant Referee NEVER allows a scrimmage kick to
Be attempted without the REQUIRED shoe, there could  should
NEVER be a question about a re-kick.

[VALJ]

Failure to wear required equipment is a USC foul, is it not?  In which case, it's got succeeding spot enforcement.  Since the game is over, there's no succeeding spot.

That said, ideally the WH will catch this and not allow the play to go off.

[Ralph Damren]

Failure to wear required equipment is a USC foul, is it not?  In which case, it's got succeeding spot enforcement.  Since the game is over, there's no succeeding spot.

That said, ideally the WH will catch this and not allow the play to go off.

Failure to wear is now only a send-off, no foul;
Wearing illegal equipment is still a USC on coach.

[VALJ]

Ah, yes - forgot the rule change.

Still, after the fact, there really isn't anything we can do, is there?  Game over.

[Ralph Damren]

Ah, yes - forgot the rule change.

Still, after the fact, there really isn't anything we can do, is there?  Game over.

Even if you considered his bare foot as illegal equipment, IMHO, it's time go.

[JasonTX]

Perhaps the kicker was happy he made the kick and removed the shoe after the kick and tossed it to the blonde chick on the front row in celebration.