PSK

[RickKY]

Also, how can you have a POST-SCRIMMAGE KICK foul before there is even a scrimmage kick?  It just doesn't make sense.  That's probably where the Rules Interpreter is getting hung up on.  As we all (should) know, "Post-Scrimmage Kick" in this sense means "after the ball is scrimmage kicked".  Sounds like the rule went and included the part of the play that is "PRE-Scrimmage Kick".

For those that want to say that it is a post-scrimmage kick definition and not a post-scrimmage kick foul, if the period covered by the rule includes the entire down up until the kick ends, why is the word "Post" in there?  Why isn't it just a "Scrimmage Kick" rule?

The 3rd requirement for PSK enforcement is that the foul must occur beyond the ENZ.  Thus, it is assumed that any foul that occurs in or behind the ENZ is pre-scrimmage kick, and any foul beyond the ENZ is post-scrimmage kick.  Since officials are not supposed to be watching the ball, this judgement is removed by the PSK procedure for enforcement.

[hoochycoochy]

The dispute is when the window for PSK opens.

Does a PSK fouls start at the snap or when the ball is kicked? Actually he said PSK starts after the ball is kicked and crossed the NZ.

I understand the PSK window to be from the snap until it is possessed by rule, goes OOB, or goes into the EZ.

I didn't see anyone address this earlier so if it was I apologize for doing it again but IIRC, the year the rule first came out, the window opened when it was kicked.  The following year it was changed to "at the snap".  Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I seem to recall that.  Maybe your interpreter is mistakenly recalling that. 

[AlUpstateNY]

Maybe I missed something, but where exactly is the debate on the meaning of "window"?  You're the only person that seems to be having an issue with the meaning of this word when it is applied to a span of time.

A rule book should define terms that are specific to the game it governs.  It should NEVER start defining words that should have been part of a person's basic education.  As I said previously, if it did THAT then it would become as unwieldly as a dictionary.

It is a terrific objective to keep our rule book as simple and “wieldy” as possible.  I don’t have “an issue with the meaning of this word when it is applied to a span of time.”  My suggestion simply was that the word “window” has no application related to this rule, so why clutter any discussion with it? 

The wording of the rule seems reasonably clear and understandable to most, why muck it up with concepts that aren’t relevant?  Is there some part of  NF: 2-16-h that even remotely hints at the existence, or relevance, of a “window” ?

[hoochycoochy]

.... Is there some part of  NF: 2-16-h that even remotely hints at the existence, or relevance, of a “window” ?

Why yes, Alf, there is.  It opens at the snap and closes when the kick ends.  It's relevant because a foul by R after the kick ends isn't subject to PSK.  In fact the word "during" is used twice and the word "before" is used once in the rule.  

[RickKY]

The window of time, for which PSK enforcement applies according to the rule, is during a scrimmage kick play AND before the end of the kick.  That would include the time between the snap and the actual kick.  Al is correct.  The word 'window' does not appear in the rule book, or in the case book.

I stand corrected though.  Rule 2-16 does mention PSK fouls.  I originally stated there are no PSK fouls, only PSK enforcements.

[jg-me]

Though the book uses the term PSK fouls, the 'PSK' in this case is an adjective as there is no such foul as 'PSK'. The term simply means a foul that meets the criteria to qualify for PSK enforcement. If it helps someone to think of the time span requirement for qualifying for PSK enforcement as a window of oppportunity, I don't see any harm.

[AlUpstateNY]

Why yes, Alf, there is.  It opens at the snap and closes when the kick ends.  It's relevant because a foul by R after the kick ends isn't subject to PSK.  In fact the word "during" is used twice and the word "before" is used once in the rule.  

If the perception of a window, opening and closing, somehow helps you correctly understand the concept of PSK, by all means use it, but the concept, much less the phrase, is simply not germane to understanding the rule.  The status of ANY foul changes, if committed after a kick ends.

[jjseikel]

It is a terrific objective to keep our rule book as simple and “wieldy” as possible.  I don’t have “an issue with the meaning of this word when it is applied to a span of time.”  My suggestion simply was that the word “window” has no application related to this rule, so why clutter any discussion with it? 

The wording of the rule seems reasonably clear and understandable to most, why muck it up with concepts that aren’t relevant?  Is there some part of  NF: 2-16-h that even remotely hints at the existence, or relevance, of a “window” ?

Come on hero! You're surely brighter than to pursue such a silly stance.
OK, maybe not.

Try this one:
At the end of a play the official is to sound his whistle. Do we really need a rule book definition in order to know what the meaning of sound is, as it's used in this example? Surely we can ascertain the meaning just like we can understand the meaning of a window as it's used in this topic.

Instead of bombarding us with illogical, purposeless rhetoric, try to get a grasp of the game of football followed by a clear understanding of officiating and then try to join a conversation with the goal of actually contributing something worthwhile. 

[bama_stripes]

I didn't see anyone address this earlier so if it was I apologize for doing it again but IIRC, the year the rule first came out, the window opened when it was kicked.  The following year it was changed to "at the snap".  Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I seem to recall that.  Maybe your interpreter is mistakenly recalling that. 

I thought the original rule specified that PSK enforcement only applied on fouls that happened after the kick crossed the LOS.  Then it was changed to "after the ball is kicked", then to our current rule.

But I could be dreaming.........

[hoochycoochy]

I thought the original rule specified that PSK enforcement only applied on fouls that happened after the kick crossed the LOS.  Then it was changed to "after the ball is kicked", then to our current rule.

But I could be dreaming.........

You could be perfectly correct.  It was something other than what it is now.   

[jjseikel]

The status of ANY foul changes, if committed after a kick ends.

Say what?
Never mind. I'm not even going to ask. I think I may follow the lead of Mike L.

[AlUpstateNY]

Come on hero! You're surely brighter than to pursue such a silly stance.
OK, maybe not.Try this one: At the end of a play the official is to sound his whistle. Do we really need a rule book definition in order to know what the meaning of sound is, as it's used in this example? Surely we can ascertain the meaning just like we can understand the meaning of a window as it's used in this topic. Instead of bombarding us with illogical, purposeless rhetoric, try to get a grasp of the game of football followed by a clear understanding of officiating and then try to join a conversation with the goal of actually contributing something worthwhile. 

Clearly, you seem to have a wild hair irritating your lower end, Jaybird.  I’d wonder why, but honestly I won’t bother because I really couldn’t care less.  You act more like a frustrated angry child, who nobody bothers to listen to, complaining about something that really doesn’t matter.

Sorry, but your ranting really doesn’t warrant responding to, despite your printing in blue, so if you don’t mind too terribly much, I’ll just ignore you, at least until you might happen to stumble across something that might matter and is worth discussing.

[hoochycoochy]

The status of ANY foul changes, if committed after a kick ends.

I still have a hangover but I've recovered enough this afternoon to know that I have no idea what that means. 

[AlUpstateNY]

I still have a hangover but I've recovered enough this afternoon to know that I have no idea what that means. 

Should I be surprised you have no idea what that means?

[hoochycoochy]

Should I be surprised you have no idea what that means?

No, you should try to make sense once in a while. 

[Magician]

No, you should try to make sense once in a while. 

I have no idea what he means by that statement either and I don't drink!  It must be wording in the clock operators manual.  Notice how he hasn't acknowledged or denied that he's a clock operator?  Knowing Alf too well I know he'll say it wasn't worth acknowledging.

[Welpe]

No, you should try to make sense once in a while. 

Time to face facts that we just can't process him with a normal brain.

[hoochycoochy]

Time to face facts that we just can't process him with a normal brain.

Adonis DNA?

[AlUpstateNY]

I have no idea what he means by that statement either and I don't drink!  It must be wording in the clock operators manual.  Notice how he hasn't acknowledged or denied that he's a clock operator?  Knowing Alf too well I know he'll say it wasn't worth acknowledging.

You seem plagued by some negative history, or some problem, with the role of a clock operator, Magician.  It almost sounds like you hold yourself above that role, perhaps because you, and a few mouthy colleagues, have convinced yourselves to believe some exaggerated illusions of self importance, which seems a more common malady with the least mature of our profession. 

I don’t know how long you’ve been doing, this thing we do, but based on the quality of your offerings and your attitude, I feel comfortable presuming it hasn’t been all that long, or has yet been all that effective.  Not that it matters much, other than for accumulating enjoyable experiences and memories, but I suspect I’ve spent more seasons between football sidelines than you’ve spent on this planet.   

I don’t know how things are set up in your area, but here, we require all our game timers to be certified, active officials who are part of the assigned game crew who participate fully from pre-game meetings to post-game reviews.  We’ve found the exposure helps broaden our newer official’s perspective and provides opportunity for senior officials to remain involved and lend constructive experience and advice.

If you choose to continue officiating, at some point you, will hopefully, come to understand that no matter how smart you think you’ve become, about the intricacies of the rules and mechanics of our craft, they are not nearly as important as the wisdom and maturity you will be counted on to bring to the application of those rules and mechanics that are designed, primarily, to assist in the management and supervision of the game.

If you last, you’ll eventually realize that the more you think you know, only exposes you to understanding, more clearly, how much more there is for you to learn.  It’s really a road you’ll never get to the end of, and the sooner you accept the reality that you will continue to leave an odor behind in any bathrooms you use along the way, will make the trip a lot more enjoyable. 

[waltjp]

Adonis DNA?

Tiger Blood.

[waltjp]

You seem plagued by some negative history, or some problem, with the role of a clock operator, Magician.  It almost sounds like you hold yourself above that role, perhaps because you, and a few mouthy colleagues, have convinced yourselves to believe some exaggerated illusions of self importance, which seems a more common malady with the least mature of our profession. 

I don’t know how long you’ve been doing, this thing we do, but based on the quality of your offerings and your attitude, I feel comfortable presuming it hasn’t been all that long, or has yet been all that effective.  Not that it matters much, other than for accumulating enjoyable experiences and memories, but I suspect I’ve spent more seasons between football sidelines than you’ve spent on this planet.   

I don’t know how things are set up in your area, but here, we require all our game timers to be certified, active officials who are part of the assigned game crew who participate fully from pre-game meetings to post-game reviews.  We’ve found the exposure helps broaden our newer official’s perspective and provides opportunity for senior officials to remain involved and lend constructive experience and advice.

If you choose to continue officiating, at some point you, will hopefully, come to understand that no matter how smart you think you’ve become, about the intricacies of the rules and mechanics of our craft, they are not nearly as important as the wisdom and maturity you will be counted on to bring to the application of those rules and mechanics that are designed, primarily, to assist in the management and supervision of the game.

If you last, you’ll eventually realize that the more you think you know, only exposes you to understanding, more clearly, how much more there is for you to learn.  It’s really a road you’ll never get to the end of, and the sooner you accept the reality that you will continue to leave an odor behind in any bathrooms you use along the way, will make the trip a lot more enjoyable. 

Alf, much can be learned from our more experienced counterparts if, and this is where you fall short, they have some grasp of the rules of the game and an ability to communicate that wisdom.  Your 'common sense' rulings lack the wide acceptance that most 'common sense' knowledge seems to enjoy.

[jjseikel]

Alf, much can be learned from our more experienced counterparts if, and this is where you fall short, they have some grasp of the rules of the game and an ability to communicate that wisdom.  Your 'common sense' rulings lack the wide acceptance that most 'common sense' knowledge seems to enjoy.

Now,, that,, makes,, sense!
 

[AlUpstateNY]

Alf, much can be learned from our more experienced counterparts if, and this is where you fall short, they have some grasp of the rules of the game and an ability to communicate that wisdom.  Your 'common sense' rulings lack the wide acceptance that most 'common sense' knowledge seems to enjoy.

Waltjp, what you, your echo Jaybird and several other petty schmucks, don't seem to grasp is that I'm not looking for, nor see any special value or advantage in your "acceptance".   Your veiled, childish  "cheap shots" just make you look..... childish.  If you don't agree with something I might suggest, by all means feel free to totally ignore me and follow your heart.  If you disagree, challenge the suggestion with something better, those are options everyone has about anything suggested, and is the purpose of these exchanges. 

If you ever should have a better idea, do us all a favor and share it with everybody.  If it makes sense, I'll gladly try it, if not I'll continue on without it, or maybe challenge it.  Sniping at you for suggesting it, however, accomplishes nothing and would make me look petty and pathetic, like you sound when you allow your frustrations to dictate your behavior.

One thing this avocation has taught me is to discount empty chirping from those hiding on the sideline who simply don't matter, and forgive me but you have never provided anything that would suggest you matter.  You seem so desperate to make yourself sound relevant but come across as just being bitter and pathetic.  Sniping at me is not going to get you there, what you might concentrate on is trying to find something actually relevant you could bring to the table, and the rest should follow.

[waltjp]

For someone who doesn't care what others have to say you sure spend a lot of time commenting on what others have to say.

I'm not here to try to persuade you to change your thinking - that endeavor was long ago proved fruitless.  It just seems odd to me that someone who claims to be a mentor doesn't care about how he's perceived by others.

I'm just saying...

[AlUpstateNY]

For someone who doesn't care what others have to say you sure spend a lot of time commenting on what others have to say.

I'm not here to try to persuade you to change your thinking - that endeavor was long ago proved fruitless.  It just seems odd to me that someone who claims to be a mentor doesn't care about how he's perceived by others.

I'm just saying...

No, you're just whining and looking for an argument.  By the way, I never claimed to be anyone's "mentor", and it's not that I don't care how I'm perceived by others, I don't care how I'm perceived by those I've concluded don't matter or have nothing of value to offer.