Author Topic: New Kick Penalty Rule  (Read 10980 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
New Kick Penalty Rule
« on: July 07, 2018, 07:31:36 AM »
Shouldn't the casebook play in 5.1.3 situation B be amended? Or am I missing something about the new rule? Under the Ruling: "If the penalty is accepted by R, the down would be replayed from K's 30..." Is this not a "tack-on" situation? If so, one of R's options would be to accept the penalty, and get the ball 1st and 10 at the R30.

Offline js in sc

  • *
  • Posts: 194
  • FAN REACTION: +17/-7
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #1 on: July 07, 2018, 09:33:44 AM »
I believe you are correct, except it would be 1 and 10 from R's 20 since the 10 would be the succeeding spot. (10-4-2 Exception)

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 4654
  • FAN REACTION: +864/-28
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #2 on: July 10, 2018, 01:05:24 PM »
Have made NFHS aware of this. The fact that it isn't preceded by an * ,as all new cases are, tells me that it was an existing case that wasn't picked up and tweaked after this year's rule change. Several new cases are usually added with each new rule change, but the challenge is do any of the current cases need to be removed/adjusted. Usually the NFHS prints additional cases in August and also lists any needed corrections.

Offline GA Umpire

  • Refstripes Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 346
  • FAN REACTION: +30/-3
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #3 on: July 10, 2018, 01:48:13 PM »
Speaking of the 2018 casebook.
Does anyone know when the 2018 case book will be posted to the NFHS site for Publications?

The 2018 Rules Book is up and available, but not the case book.

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 721
  • FAN REACTION: +633/-113
  • See it, Think about it, Pass on it if possible!
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #4 on: July 10, 2018, 02:43:06 PM »
OOPS

Hey Ralph, Take a look at this revised Ruling

5.1.3. SITUATION B...
RULING: If the penalty is accepted by R, R may choose to have the penalty enforced from the previous spot and the down would be replayed from K's 30 yard line, or R may choose to retain possession AND have the penalty tacked-on from the succeeding spot (spot of recovery); R will put the ball in play first and 10 from its 20-yard line. If the penalty is declined, R will put the ball in play first and 10 from its 10-yard line, the spot of recovery. (5-1-3,10-4-2 EXCEPTION, 10-5-1j)
SEE everything that you CALL, but; Don't CALL everything you SEE!
Never let the Rules Book get in the way of a great ball game!

Respectfully Submitted;
Some guy on a message forum

Offline sczeebra

  • *
  • Posts: 150
  • FAN REACTION: +4/-5
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #5 on: July 10, 2018, 04:48:12 PM »
While we are on the subject of this new rule, could ya'll take a look at 2018 casebook play 10.5.3 SITUATION C:. Could not R take the results of the play and enforce K's holding on the try? As always, thanks and have a great year!

Offline ncwingman

  • *
  • Posts: 1269
  • FAN REACTION: +72/-13
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #6 on: July 10, 2018, 08:16:58 PM »
While we are on the subject of this new rule, could ya'll take a look at 2018 casebook play 10.5.3 SITUATION C:. Could not R take the results of the play and enforce K's holding on the try? As always, thanks and have a great year!

For those of you without your case book handy -- K is punting from their own 4. During the kick, K2 holds in K's end zone. R returns the punt for a TD. Previous options -- accept the penalty and the safety or decline the penalty and take the touchdown.

I believe this is correct that the new rule allows R to have the enforcement spot as the succeeding spot. It is a foul by K during a scrimmage kick down and R is the next to put the ball in play.

Furthermore, the way 8-2-3 is written, R must take the penalty on the try (and not on the ensuing kickoff) if they choose the succeeding spot enforcement as the foul occurred prior to the change of possession (i.e., 8-2-3 doesn't actually apply).

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 721
  • FAN REACTION: +633/-113
  • See it, Think about it, Pass on it if possible!
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #7 on: July 11, 2018, 01:47:32 PM »

I agree with NCwingman 

Best option - Take the TD and half the distance on the TRY
SEE everything that you CALL, but; Don't CALL everything you SEE!
Never let the Rules Book get in the way of a great ball game!

Respectfully Submitted;
Some guy on a message forum

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 4654
  • FAN REACTION: +864/-28
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #8 on: July 12, 2018, 07:08:33 AM »
I agree with NCwingman 

Best option - Take the TD and half the distance on the TRY
KWH was the author of this rule change. When the author of a change agrees with something, I then agree with the author. KWH was also the author of the rule outlawing the dreaded Oregonian flea-flicker. KWH can also drink more beer than I can.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #9 on: July 13, 2018, 06:59:42 AM »
7.2.1 situation B ruling needs an editorial update to read R will likely accept the penalty by K at the succeeding spot.

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 4654
  • FAN REACTION: +864/-28
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #10 on: July 16, 2018, 10:22:52 AM »
When we added the "carry-over" provision on fouls by opponents of the scoring team, part of the rationale was that it would prevent a cheap shot by an opponent, knowing that the penalty would be declined to keep the score. If the foul occurred prior to a change of possession, the fouling player wouldn't have knowledge of the upcoming score. With PSK, the assumption is K is assumed to turn the ball over. With our new "tack-on" rule, the assumption is the same.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #11 on: July 17, 2018, 10:55:41 AM »
I'm assuming 10.1.3 Situation is the same way. K fouls illegal use of hands, R signals fair catch, then runs with the ball. Ruling states, "R may decline the penalty by K and retain possession." With the new exception, it's not necessary for R to decline the foul to keep the ball is it? R may take the K penalty at the succeeding spot, and then have their delay of game marked off after that, right? Since one was live-ball, one was dead-ball, it is not a double foul.


Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 2116
  • FAN REACTION: +301/-25
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #12 on: July 17, 2018, 11:01:07 AM »
I'm assuming 10.1.3 Situation is the same way. K fouls illegal use of hands, R signals fair catch, then runs with the ball. Ruling states, "R may decline the penalty by K and retain possession." With the new exception, it's not necessary for R to decline the foul to keep the ball is it? R may take the K penalty at the succeeding spot, and then have their delay of game marked off after that, right? Since one was live-ball, one was dead-ball, it is not a double foul.



Do not confuse the "tack-on" rule as a "live ball treated as dead ball foul" like UNS would be.

The scenario you gave would be the exact same ruling last year as it is this year.

Good point to bring up because I bet lots of people have the same question!

Edit: But yes, you can enforce the K foul at the succeeding spot, then enforce the DOG.  I read that too quick.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #13 on: July 17, 2018, 11:04:25 AM »
You may need to explain further. Are you saying that this situation is treated the same way this year as it was last year, and the new kick rule enforcement does not apply? Because I think it does. I may not have provided enough information. the situation reads that K illegally used hands during the kick. To me, that fits the parameters of the new kick rule exception, and R CAN accept K's foul and still keep the ball. The situation in the case book states that for R to keep the ball, they must decline K's foul. It goes on to further state that if R accepts the foul, we go back to previous spot, mark off both, and replay the down. That's not right is it?

*** Disregard... thanks for the clarification
« Last Edit: July 17, 2018, 11:08:43 AM by CalhounLJ »

Offline Stinterp

  • *
  • Posts: 188
  • FAN REACTION: +4/-16
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #14 on: July 17, 2018, 07:01:57 PM »
I think the confusion is coming from the "succeeding spot" terminology on free kick plays
« Last Edit: July 17, 2018, 07:07:09 PM by Stinterp »

Offline NCAA-SJ

  • *
  • Posts: 60
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-2
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #15 on: July 17, 2018, 09:23:25 PM »
I feel certain that this has been overlooked and not the intent of this rule, however, the rule reads during a kick 'down'...not during the kick.  Why did they choose the word 'down' in this rule?  With that, it means ANY K foul during the 'entire down', not just the kick part.
So, K punts from the K30. R22 catches punt at R20, runs to the R30, where K80 commits a facemask penalty and causes R22 to fumble.  R44 recovers the fumble and runs to the 50 where he is tackled. 
Because K fouled during the 'down', this foul can be tacked on from the succeeding spot, 50yd, and R will get the ball at the K35.

This cannot be the intent, but is exactly what the rule reads currently.  Has there been any word to the contrary?

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #16 on: July 18, 2018, 09:08:07 AM »
This feels like an iphone update. Apple is notorious for sending out an update and then dealing with the glitches as they pop up. This appears to be a glitch in the exception... I suspect an updated exception in the future.

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 721
  • FAN REACTION: +633/-113
  • See it, Think about it, Pass on it if possible!
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #17 on: July 20, 2018, 10:50:40 AM »
I feel certain that this has been overlooked and not the intent of this rule, however, the rule reads during a kick 'down'...not during the kick.  Why did they choose the word 'down' in this rule?  With that, it means ANY K foul during the 'entire down', not just the kick part.
So, K punts from the K30. R22 catches punt at R20, runs to the R30, where K80 commits a facemask penalty and causes R22 to fumble.  R44 recovers the fumble and runs to the 50 where he is tackled. 
Because K fouled during the 'down', this foul can be tacked on from the succeeding spot, 50yd, and R will get the ball at the K35.

This cannot be the intent, but is exactly what the rule reads currently.  Has there been any word to the contrary?

This was the intent of the rule which is why the rule reads the way it does.  Restated, the rule is in effect for ANY Live Ball K foul during the down.
Yes, in your play the succeeding spot is the 50. Enforce the FM foul from there.
The revised interpretation of this play will be, because the foul occurred after the end of the kick, it occurred during a running play, basic spot enforcement which is the end of the related run, the R30.
Note that in your play if R22 had been Face-masked but not fumbled,  continued on, and returned the ball to the 50, the FM penalty would also be enforced from the 50.

What am I missing???  What I was missing was the interpretation from the NFHS.  I was wrong and I made the corrections.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2018, 01:56:23 PM by KWH »
SEE everything that you CALL, but; Don't CALL everything you SEE!
Never let the Rules Book get in the way of a great ball game!

Respectfully Submitted;
Some guy on a message forum

Offline NCAA-SJ

  • *
  • Posts: 60
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-2
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #18 on: July 20, 2018, 02:51:40 PM »
This was the intent of the rule which is why the rule reads the way it does.  Restated, the rule is in effect for ANY Live Ball K foul during the down.
Yes, in your play the succeeding spot is the 50. Enforce the FM foul from there.
Note that in your play if R22 had been Facemasked but not fumbled,  continued on, and returned the ball to the 50, the FM penalty would also be enforced from the 50.

What am I missing???
That's the way I read it as well.  But what I cannot understand is that the intent was to supposedly reduce 're-kicks'.  Well, a foul after possession would not be a re-kick anyway.  This is quite different from the NCAA rule (not that they were exactly trying to mirror it).  Any foul after possession has its own basic spot (end of related run).  Now with this, for those fouls it's basically telling us the same spot (succeeding spot)...unless of course like in my example there are more than one post possession related runs.  I don't like it at all, but I want to properly understand it before I start teaching it locally to our group.  Thanks for the comment.

Offline Curious

  • *
  • Posts: 1313
  • FAN REACTION: +36/-50
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #19 on: July 20, 2018, 04:32:32 PM »
For those of you without your case book handy -- K is punting from their own 4. During the kick, K2 holds in K's end zone. R returns the punt for a TD. Previous options -- accept the penalty and the safety or decline the penalty and take the touchdown.

I believe this is correct that the new rule allows R to have the enforcement spot as the succeeding spot. It is a foul by K during a scrimmage kick down and R is the next to put the ball in play.

Furthermore, the way 8-2-3 is written, R must take the penalty on the try (and not on the ensuing kickoff) if they choose the succeeding spot enforcement as the foul occurred prior to the change of possession (i.e., 8-2-3 doesn't actually apply).

If R accepts the holding foul (occurring in the EZ) the effect is a safety as the enforcement spot is really not the previous spot - it's the spot of the foul.  Therefore K would be the next to snap the ball (free kick back to R) which, by rule, would eliminate R's option to tack it on. 8-2-3 requires that, during a TD scoring play, if the opponent of the scoring team fouls, the foul must occur prior to the COP - which in this play, is not the case. What am I missing? :!#

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #20 on: July 20, 2018, 04:46:49 PM »
I agree that cases like this need to be addressed officially, but I also believe that this new exception was not meant to disrupt the basic philosophy of penalty administration. In this case R would need to decline the holding foul to keep the Td, because it is impossible to have both. The ironclad rule regarding fouls in the EZ dictate that there is no distance awarded with this foul, the penalty IS the safety. To my knowledge it is still impossible to “tack on” two points to a TD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 721
  • FAN REACTION: +633/-113
  • See it, Think about it, Pass on it if possible!
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #21 on: July 20, 2018, 07:47:48 PM »
I think some may be trying to over think this new rule.
Perhaps a different simple way to remember this new rule is:

For 10-4-2c to be in effect the following must occur:
1) K must legally kick the football, (this is not the NCAA rule so there is no requirement that the ball cross any line, in fact, in NFHS, it could be blocked for negative yardage) AND,
2) K must commit ANY live ball foul until the end of the kick AT ANY TIME during the Kick down, (this is not the NCAA rule so there is no requirement of when or even where the K foul occurs), AND
3) K is NOT next to put the ball in play!
If all three of these criteria are met,  the offended team, R, may choose succeeding spot enforcement with one exception, if R scores a Touchdown.
If R scores a Touchdown, the succeeding spot is the TRY, UNLESS the criteria of 8-2-3 has been met ( ie; the K foul occurred after the final change of possession);
If 8-2-3 applies, R may choose enforcement of the penalty on the TRY or the Subsequent Kickoff.

So... all the options from 2017 are still intact, however, in addition, we can now offer up the "tack-on option" as well.

I hope this helps... pi1eOn

I was incorrect and I made my corrections in RED
« Last Edit: July 25, 2018, 02:00:26 PM by KWH »
SEE everything that you CALL, but; Don't CALL everything you SEE!
Never let the Rules Book get in the way of a great ball game!

Respectfully Submitted;
Some guy on a message forum

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #22 on: July 21, 2018, 11:27:16 AM »
I feel certain that this has been overlooked and not the intent of this rule, however, the rule reads during a kick 'down'...not during the kick.  Why did they choose the word 'down' in this rule?  With that, it means ANY K foul during the 'entire down', not just the kick part.
So, K punts from the K30. R22 catches punt at R20, runs to the R30, where K80 commits a facemask penalty and causes R22 to fumble.  R44 recovers the fumble and runs to the 50 where he is tackled. 
Because K fouled during the 'down', this foul can be tacked on from the succeeding spot, 50yd, and R will get the ball at the K35.

This cannot be the intent, but is exactly what the rule reads currently.  Has there been any word to the contrary?

This was the intent of the rule which is why the rule reads the way it does.  Restated, the rule is in effect for ANY Live Ball K foul during the down.
Yes, in your play the succeeding spot is the 50. Enforce the FM foul from there.
Note that in your play if R22 had been Facemasked but not fumbled,  continued on, and returned the ball to the 50, the FM penalty would also be enforced from the 50.

What am I missing???

Can we go back to this play for just a minute. Just to make sure I understand. Does this mean that during a kicking down, the basic spot has been changed because of this new exception? Before this exception, we would go back to where R22 fumbled and make that the basic spot of enforcement, because that was the end of the run which was related to the foul. But now, what I'm gathering is that for K fouls during a kick down, that is no longer the case. Now, the end of the related run in this scenario would have no significance, because K fouled during a kicking down and the exception states that foul is enforced from the succeeding spot. Is that what we are saying?

Offline bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 2936
  • FAN REACTION: +115/-27
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #23 on: July 23, 2018, 08:47:57 PM »
K attempts a field goal, but is flagged for holding.  The kick goes into R’s EZ but is no good.

R’s ball at the R-30?

Offline FLAHL

  • *
  • Posts: 900
  • FAN REACTION: +52/-9
Re: New Kick Penalty Rule
« Reply #24 on: July 24, 2018, 08:08:29 AM »
K attempts a field goal, but is flagged for holding.  The kick goes into R’s EZ but is no good.

R’s ball at the R-30?

If I understand KWH's post above, it sure is.

K legally kicked the ball - check
K committed a foul at any time during the down - check
K is NOT next to put the ball in play - check
R did not score a TD - check

R can accept the penalty administered from the succeeding spot (R's 20) - check