RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => National Federation Discussion => Topic started by: GoGoGo on March 14, 2011, 08:16:10 AM
-
Let's discuss PSK because I disagree with my Rules Interpreter.
When does the window for PSK open and close?
When can you have a foul for PSK?
-
Don't know what your "dispute" is about, but NF: 2-16-h spells out the 5 requirements necessary for PSK enforcement. What may be helpful is to recall the reasoning behind creating a PSK enforcement. Essentially, that the defensive team had accomplished it's task and had forced the offensive team to relinquish possession by choosing to kick the ball.
Since a kick is a loose ball, and the basic spot for a loose ball foul is the previous spot and repeating the down, the consenus was that considering fouls committed by Team B after the ball had been kicked, being considered loose ball fouls prior to an actual change of team possession, provided an excessve penalty to "B".
The conclusion was that Team "B", although responsible for their foul and should be held accountable by paying a reasonable yardage penalty, should not be deprived of the benefit of forcing Team "A" to relinquish possession of the ball, byt their superior and foul free play. Conversely, it was concluded that Team A, having been defended into deciding to volumtarily give up possession of the ball, did not earn the right to have possession awarded to them because of any foul B committed after the kick "crossed the expanded NZ".
-
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.
-
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'm not sure about the current case book number since what I have here at the office is the 2009 book, but your rules interpreter should read 10.4.3 sit G. You are correct, the "window" opens at the snap.
-
Don't know what your "dispute" is about, but NF: 2-16-h spells out the 5 requirements necessary for PSK enforcement. What may be helpful is to recall the reasoning behind creating a PSK enforcement. Essentially, that the defensive team had accomplished it's task and had forced the offensive team to relinquish possession by choosing to kick the ball.
Since a kick is a loose ball, and the basic spot for a loose ball foul is the previous spot and repeating the down, the consenus was that considering fouls committed by Team B after the ball had been kicked, being considered loose ball fouls prior to an actual change of team possession, provided an excessve penalty to "B".
The conclusion was that Team "B", although responsible for their foul and should be held accountable by paying a reasonable yardage penalty, should not be deprived of the benefit of forcing Team "A" to relinquish possession of the ball, byt their superior and foul free play. Conversely, it was concluded that Team A, having been defended into deciding to volumtarily give up possession of the ball, did not earn the right to have possession awarded to them because of any foul B committed after the kick "crossed the expanded NZ".
After all that and still no answer.
Does a PSK fouls start at the snap or when the ball is kicked?
GoGo,
... at the snap.
-
Jaybird and Mike L- Thanks.
-
I believe what he (the supervisor) is thinking is 2010 case book play 10.4.3 (B) where K has the ball at their own 40 yard line and R10 holds K11 at the K42?
Perhaps he is confusing the kick crossing the ENZ with the R foul occurring in the ENZ?
-
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.
GoGoGo,
Sounds like your Rules Interpreter is stuck in the year 2003 when PSK first came into NFHS play. When the NFHS adopted PSK, there was indeed a "window" that the foul by R was after the ball was kicked and before the kick ended. The "window" was removed in 2004.
As others have stated ... PSK enforcement starts at the snap.
-
Here's the problem with "window opens at the snap" vs "window opens when the kick crosses the NZ":
Yes, PSK enforcement starts with fouls after the snap, IF there is a kick that crosses the NZ.
So yes, "the window opens at the snap", but, there is no window unless there is a kick that crosses the NZ.
So philosophically, how can window that does not yet exist, actually open?
-
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?
-
Here's the problem with "window opens at the snap" vs "window opens when the kick crosses the NZ":
Yes, PSK enforcement starts with fouls after the snap, IF there is a kick that crosses the NZ.
So yes, "the window opens at the snap", but, there is no window unless there is a kick that crosses the NZ.
So philosophically, how can window that does not yet exist, actually open?
Windows always exist, it's a question of whether they are passed thru.
-
They could run a screen whether the window is closed or open! LOL (I know. It wasn't that funny and don't quit my day job.)
-
It would pane me greatly to frame a reply to that. :-X
-
why is the word "Post" in there? Why isn't it just a "Scrimmage Kick" rule?
Quite simply the Post modifier (or adjective, or what ever it is called in grammer terms) applies to enforcement, not kick.
It could also be writen 'Enforcement after a scrimmage kick'.
-
Quite simply the Post modifier (or adjective, or what ever it is called in grammer terms) applies to enforcement, not kick.
It could also be writen 'Enforcement after a scrimmage kick'.
Well, no. If they were talking about enforcement and not the kick itself, then the period during the down that occurs AFTER the kick has ended would get included as well, because enforcement doesn't happen until the DOWN ends. Not EVERY scrimmage kick ends with the ball being downed by K downfield and PSK rules do not apply to any fouls occurring during a run-back.
-
Can someone point me to where I can find the definition of "window" in the NFHS code? If not, perhaps it's just another of those terms we all use from time to time to try and explain a cncept that means dfferent things to different people and really has no specific meaning, as related to football .
-
Can someone point me to where I can find the definition of "window" in the NFHS code? If not, perhaps it's just another of those terms we all use from time to time to try and explain a cncept that means dfferent things to different people and really has no specific meaning, as related to football .
Well, it's based on common sense and reason rather than a strict reading of the words on the page. ;)
-
Can someone point me to where I can find the definition of "window" in the NFHS code? If not, perhaps it's just another of those terms we all use from time to time to try and explain a cncept that means dfferent things to different people and really has no specific meaning, as related to football .
It's transparent!
-
Can someone point me to where I can find the definition of "window" in the NFHS code? If not, perhaps it's just another of those terms we all use from time to time to try and explain a cncept that means dfferent things to different people and really has no specific meaning, as related to football .
"Window" has a specific meaning and is used in everyday English in this manner. We can't have the rulebook providing definitions for every word in the English language. If it did then it would become a dictionary rather than a rule book. Try this definition from dictionary.com:
WINDOW...
6. a period of time regarded as highly favorable for initiating or completing something: Investors have a window of perhaps six months before interest rates rise.
In football, a PSK window would be the time during which PSK rules are in effect. Similarly, an FBZ window would be the time during which the free blocking zone exists.
-
"Window" has a specific meaning and is used in everyday English in this manner. We can't have the rulebook providing definitions for every word in the English language. If it did then it would become a dictionary rather than a rule book. Try this definition from dictionary.com:
In football, a PSK window would be the time during which PSK rules are in effect. Similarly, an FBZ window would be the time during which the free blocking zone exists.
Excellent suggestion for a definition, but that doesn't mean it works for everyone. There seems to be more than enough trouble gaining universal agreement on specific terms that are defined in the NFHS code, without making presumptions about terms that are not defined.
Transparency is great, and I'm a firm believer in applying common sense to rule interpretations, but using, and worse debating, terms that are NOT defined by rule just seems like a road leading nowhere.
-
Can someone point me to where I can find the definition of "window" in the NFHS code? If not, perhaps it's just another of those terms we all use from time to time to try and explain a cncept that means dfferent things to different people and really has no specific meaning, as related to football .
::)
-
Excellent suggestion for a definition, but that doesn't mean it works for everyone. There seems to be more than enough trouble gaining universal agreement on specific terms that are defined in the NFHS code, without making presumptions about terms that are not defined.
Transparency is great, and I'm a firm believer in applying common sense to rule interpretations, but using, and worse debating, terms that are NOT defined by rule just seems like a road leading nowhere.
LOL
-
Excellent suggestion for a definition, but that doesn't mean it works for everyone. There seems to be more than enough trouble gaining universal agreement on specific terms that are defined in the NFHS code, without making presumptions about terms that are not defined.
Transparency is great, and I'm a firm believer in applying common sense to rule interpretations, but using, and worse debating, terms that are NOT defined by rule just seems like a road leading nowhere.
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.
-
... where exactly is the debate on the meaning of "window"?
Between Alf's ears!
-
Here's the problem with "window opens at the snap" vs "window opens when the kick crosses the NZ":
Yes, PSK enforcement starts with fouls after the snap, IF there is a kick that crosses the NZ.
So yes, "the window opens at the snap", but, there is no window unless there is a kick that crosses the NZ.
So philosophically, how can window that does not yet exist, actually open?
There are no PSK fouls, only PSK enforcement of fouls. Flag the foul when it occurs. Enforce it after the down ends. It may or may not be a PSK enforcement depending on the requirements for PSK enforcement. If the fouls occurs after the snap and before the kick ends, it is a candidate for PSK enforcement, depending on other action during the down. All the PSK requirements must be met to use PSK enforcement.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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” ?
-
.... 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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.........
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
Should I be surprised you have no idea what that means?
No, you should try to make sense once in a while.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Time to face facts that we just can't process him with a normal brain.
Adonis DNA?
-
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.
-
Adonis DNA?
Tiger Blood.
-
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.
-
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!
:thumbup
-
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.
-
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...
-
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.
-
... If it makes sense, I'll gladly try it....
Therein lies the core of the issue. It seems to me you've made it your goal on here to do just the opposite. That's why so many on here are on your case.
-
Therein lies the core of the issue. It seems to me you've made it your goal on here to do just the opposite. That's why so many on here are on your case.
What, specifically, have you ever offered that's made any sense? I'll give you a choice hoochy, I'll consider you seriously either when you grow up or offer something of value, whichever comes first.
-
What, specifically, have you ever offered that's made any sense? I'll give you a choice hoochy, I'll consider you seriously either when you grow up or offer something of value, whichever comes first.
You NOT considering me seriously is a compliment.
-
If you cannot have a PSK foul on a kick that does not cross the ENZ how can it be a foul at the snap? If using the window it doesn't open until the ball is kicked and crosses the ENZ.
-
If you cannot have a PSK foul on a kick that does not cross the ENZ how can it be a foul at the snap? If using the window it doesn't open until the ball is kicked and crosses the ENZ.
In order for R's foul to be subject to PSK enforcement it has to meet all five parts of the definition. I believe the NF makes it effective at the snap because there would be circumstances where there could be a significant time elapse between the snap and the kick, ie, the ball is snapped over the kicker's head and there's a scramble. In this situation we'd be forced to pay attention to the different time frames that would be involved. Would the 5-10 seconds between the snap, recovery and punt NOT be PSK and then once the ball flies over the NZ be PSK? Making it retroactive to the snap takes guesswork out of the situation for us. I believe it also helps the NF maintain the PSK philosophy that K is giving up the ball and will not get the ball back in a cheap way under most circumstances.
-
If you cannot have a PSK foul on a kick that does not cross the ENZ how can it be a foul at the snap? If using the window it doesn't open until the ball is kicked and crosses the ENZ.
You can’t. It's easier to understand PSK when you understand the rational behind creating PSK. Prior to PSK all, live ball fouls prior to and/or during a kick committed either by K or R were loose ball fouls, which would involve previous spot enforcement and repeating the down, with possession beingretained by A/K. (if accepted). (Roughing the passer is a unique enforcement)
The logic was that treating ALL R fouls as loose ball, unfairly and excessively penalized B/R as in addition to the penalty for whatever foul committed, it deprived B/R of the advantage they had earned by causing A/K to surrender possession of the ball by choosing to kick.
When B/R fouls after the requirements of PSK are met, enforcement is changed from loose ball to PSK, which allows B/R to keep the advantage they earned, by forcing A/K to choose to kick, and retain possession of the ball, following payment for whatever foul R committed after the kick was actually made and satisfied the requirements of PSK.
When those requirements are NOT satisfied, whatever live ball foul was committed by R reverts back to loose ball foul enforcement, or end of the run enforcement should the ball not become loose.
-
When B/R fouls after the requirements of PSK are met, enforcement is changed from loose ball to PSK...
This statement is incorrect. The foul(s) are not required to be committed after the requirements of PSK are met. Example: one of the requirements of PSK is that R will next snap the ball therefore if they foul after this requirement is met, it would be a dead ball foul not PSK. The "window" or time that R could commit a PSK foul begins at the snap and ends with the end of the kick.
-
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.
So, after all that....you really didn't answer other than trying to say how important an ECO is. I will take it that you do nothing other than run the clock. Right?
Our ECO are also officials that participate in everything and are part of the crew. Typically only the younger guys or the ones too old to move are full time ECOs. Everyone will do it at some point but we also spend our fair share of time on the field.
Did I leave out some commas?
-
Did I leave out some commas?
Nope. There were not any more available. He used 28 (when only 3 were necessary) which puts the 2011 allotment in serious jeopardy. At that rate, the comma inventory will be exhausted before July. But fear not. There is an abundance of periods, exclamation and question marks. nAnA
-
If you cannot have a PSK foul on a kick that does not cross the ENZ how can it be a foul at the snap? If using the window it doesn't open until the ball is kicked and crosses the ENZ.
It seems a number of people are getting hung up on the terminology of "POST" scrimmage kick and think the foul must come after the kick due to the "POST" part somehow implying "after" the kick. Which I guess is understandable due to how "POST" is often used in English. However, in the rule book PSK is a procedure to determine an enforcement spot for a foul by R that happens during a down in which the 5 PSK conditions are met, ie "after" the down as a whole is over. Two of those conditions together amount to the foul by R must be after the snap and before the end of the kick. So if it helps you to remember those conditions as a "window" or "time frame" or whatever, what's the harm? Just so long as you correctly remember it.
A foul at the snap cannot be a PSK foul, because by rule all fouls simultaneous with the snap are enforced from the previous spot.
editted to correct the conditions ref
-
So, after all that....you really didn't answer other than trying to say how important an ECO is. I will take it that you do nothing other than run the clock. Right?
Our ECO are also officials that participate in everything and are part of the crew. Typically only the younger guys or the ones too old to move are full time ECOs. Everyone will do it at some point but we also spend our fair share of time on the field. Did I leave out some commas?
You'll have to forgive me, footballref, but I just don't get your objective. From your tone, you sound like one of those officials who has convinced himself you are somewhat "special", and somehow better than, "the younger guys or the ones too old to move". More than likely, I'm afraid, that is a self assessed exaggeration doubtfully shared by those who work with you created by an ego pathetically desperate for attention.
Perhaps just my limited experience, but I've never found officials, who are overly impressed with themselves as ever measuring up to those self assessments. It seems those who talk about how "special" they are, rarely turn out to actually be.
I do appreciate your concern, and that of Jaybird, for my grammatical shortcomings. It’s the type guidance I’ve missed since some very kindly Nuns tried so hard to correct long ago. If only either of you could muster something of value to aid my efforts to keep abreast of what I need to understand about football officiating, I’d be ever so grateful. It doesn’t seem, unfortunately, you have very much to offer in that regard, with all your attention being focused towards what you, apparently, consider so much more important. I guess I’ll just have to muddle by without your assistance.
-
I guess I’ll just have to muddle by without your assistance.
Good Luck.
-
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” ?
I know we had the problem of defining "window" earlier. But lets see if we can get this one.
wind·bag
n.
1. The flexible air-filled chamber of a bagpipe or similar instrument.
2. Slang A talkative person who communicates nothing of substance or interest.
aWaRd
-
Wow. Al sure has raised a ruckus in here. Regardless, I'm going to continue using the term "window" in regards to the time when PSK enforcement must be used because: (a.) It is standard English that doesn't need explanation to anyone above an elementary school-level education, and (b.) I'm not one to be locked into only using words found in the rule book when discussing the game covered by the rule book. I realize that economy in communication is a good thing as long as the communication is still understood. "PSK window" is certainly more economical than "the time between when the ball is snapped for a scrimmage kick and when said scrimmage kick is recovered or becomes dead prior to possession."
-
Didn't intend to raise ay "ruckus" Fadamore, you have always been free to do exactly as you choose, for whatever reasons you choose, and you don't need my permission nor is there any need for me to undersand or approve of what you choose to do, or why you choose to do it. If it works for you, is all that should matter to you.
-
If you cannot have a PSK foul on a kick that does not cross the ENZ how can it be a foul at the snap? If using the window, it doesn't open until the ball is kicked and crosses the ENZ.
REPLY: Not quite sure what you're trying to say, skip. But here's a play where the PSK foul occurs after the snap but before the kick:
PLAY: Ball is snapped to the punter who muffs it. While the ball is rolling loose behind the neutral zone, gunner K2 is grabbed by R1 and tackled 10 yards downfield at R's 30. Now, the punter picks up the loose ball and kicks it downfield (past the ENZ). Ball rolls to a stop at R's 18. RULING: Even though the foul occurred before the kick, PSK enforcement for R1's holding foul. Penalize half the distance. R's ball, 1-10 from R's 9.
-
If I understand this correctly, the"window" or POSSIBILITY of a foul with PSK enforcement starts at the snap, but that enforcement is not triggered unless all of the conditions for it are met, including the kick crossing the expanded neutral zone. So, it doesn't matter when the foul occurred during the down, as long as all of the other conditions for PSK are met.
-
If I understand this correctly, the"window" or POSSIBILITY of a foul with PSK enforcement starts at the snap, but that enforcement is not triggered unless all of the conditions for it are met, including the kick crossing the expanded neutral zone. So, it doesn't matter when the foul occurred during the down, as long as all of the other conditions for PSK are met.
BINGO, all you're going to get from a "window" is a draft.
-
If I understand this correctly, the"window" or POSSIBILITY of a foul with PSK enforcement starts at the snap, but that enforcement is not triggered unless all of the conditions for it are met, including the kick crossing the expanded neutral zone. So, it doesn't matter when the foul occurred during the down, as long as all of the other conditions for PSK are met.
Actually, it does matter because the down does not end just because the kick has ended. Two of the conditions of PSK enforcment is after the snap and before the end of the kick. So saying "it doesn't matter when during the down the foul happens" while also saying "as long the conditions of PSK are met" is contradicting yourself.
-
Actually, it does matter because the down does not end just because the kick has ended. The down does not end once R gains possession of the kick and begin his run. PSK enforcement can only occur if the foul by R is after the snap and before the end of the kick. So saying it doesn't matter when during the down it happens while also saying the conditions of PSK must be met is contradicting yourself.
Perhaps I could have written more precisely, or included the post to which I was responding. The original question was when the "window" or opportunity for PSK enforcement begins, and Bob M replied to Skip1 with a play that mentioned PSK enforcement on fouls that occurred before the kick.
I was addressing when the "window" opens (at the snap rather than when the ball is kicked etc.) I did not address when the "window" closes, since that is not what the question was about.
When the foul occurs has no bearing on when the "window" opens. It opens at the snap. Whether you apply PSK enforcement to a foul that occurs after that depends on all of the other conditions being met.
-
If I understand this correctly, the"window" or POSSIBILITY of a foul with PSK enforcement starts at the snap, but that enforcement is not triggered unless all of the conditions for it are met, including the kick crossing the expanded neutral zone. So, it doesn't matter when the foul occurred during the down, as long as all of the other conditions for PSK are met.
REPLY: Correct. And as you clarified, as long as the foul occurred before the kick ended.
-
You can’t. It's easier to understand PSK when you understand the rational behind creating PSK. Prior to PSK all, live ball fouls prior to and/or during a kick committed either by K or R were loose ball fouls, which would involve previous spot enforcement and repeating the down, with possession beingretained by A/K. (if accepted). (Roughing the passer is a unique enforcement)
The logic was that treating ALL R fouls as loose ball, unfairly and excessively penalized B/R as in addition to the penalty for whatever foul committed, it deprived B/R of the advantage they had earned by causing A/K to surrender possession of the ball by choosing to kick.
When B/R fouls after the requirements of PSK are met, enforcement is changed from loose ball to PSK, which allows B/R to keep the advantage they earned, by forcing A/K to choose to kick, and retain possession of the ball, following payment for whatever foul R committed after the kick was actually made and satisfied the requirements of PSK.
When those requirements are NOT satisfied, whatever live ball foul was committed by R reverts back to loose ball foul enforcement, or end of the run enforcement should the ball not become loose.
Al would it be correct to add the following to your explanation above?
If the PSK requirements are met, then we're going to assume possession changed before the foul, and enforcement will take place as if it occured after the kick. Thus B retains possession by virtue of forcing A to give up the ball voluntarily.
-
Al would it be correct to add the following to your explanation above?
If the PSK requirements are met, then we're going to assume possession changed before the foul, and enforcement will take place as if it occured after the kick. Thus B retains possession by virtue of forcing A to give up the ball voluntarily.
REPLY: RickKY...I can't help it, but I break out in hives when I hear PSK described in terms of possession changing before it really has. Mainly because I fear it will confuse the newer guys. Possession isn't really a factor in PSK except for one place: Once possession changes, a legal scrimmage kick ends and there's no more possibility for a PSK enforceable foul.
Let's summarize this way...a foul by R enforceable under PSK may occur anytime between the snap and the end of the kick. That interval is what people have been calling the "window" for PSK. Now there are still other criteria that must be met, namely: foul (by R) must occur beyond the ENZ; the kick must cross the ENZ, but doesn't need to remain there; at the conclusion of the down, K must not be entitled to next put the ball in play. Though the Fed doesn't like to say it, PSK is an exception to the regular enforcement rules for fouls during a loose ball play.
-
Unfortunately the word "play" is not defined in NFHS rules, although the term "Down", which is consistently interchangeable with the word "Play", is defined. (NF: 2-7: "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). A down ends when the ball next becomes dead.")
The first requirement of a PSK foul is that, (the foul occurs) 1. During Scrimmage Kick plays (which begin with a legal snap). The 4th requirement is that the foul occurs, 4."Before the end of the kick", and NF: 2-24-2 clearly defines, "A kick ends when a player gains possession or when the ball becomes dead while not in player possession".
If the undefined term "window" helps clarify or enhance the understanding of these time frame relationships, fine, but it also apparently causes some confusion that is unnecessary, and seems to mean different things to different people.
-
Which brings me back to my original observation that it's counter-intuitive that something called a POST-scrimmage kick foul can happen BEFORE the ball is kicked during a scrimmage kick play - if the other conditions are met. (Sorry for using the undefined word "play" here.) I'm not saying your interpretation is wrong, just that the naming of the PSK definition doesn't really describe when it applies and that's probably where the interpreter in the OP got derailed.
Let's be honest, if it truly WAS a foul happening "post-scrimmage kick" (by normal English usage of the prefix "post" and the NFHS definition of "scrimmage kick"), then it would a foul that happened AFTER the scrimmage kick had ended but before the down had ended. The naming is just screwy. Just calling it "scrimmage kick enforcement" would be closer to when it really applies.
-
It is NOT necessarily a post scrimmage kick foul. If it helps, it is a post scrimmage kick penalty. Or a post scrimmage kick enforcement. Or a foul during a kicking play enforced as a post scrimmage kick foul.
But a rose by any other name ......
-
If you cannot have a PSK foul on a kick that does not cross the ENZ how can it be a foul at the snap? If using the window it doesn't open until the ball is kicked and crosses the ENZ.
REPLY: skip...think of it this way. We're not saying the foul occurs at the snap. When we speak of the "window" for PSK being from the snap till the moment the kick ends, what we are saying is that a foul that might subsequently be subject to PSK enforcement can occur anytime after the snap up until the kick ends.
And Fadamor...your question about the terminology "Post-Scrimmage Kick" foul is a good one. "Post-scrimmage kick" is not really a descriptor of the foul itself (rule 2-16-2 notwithstanding). Rather it's a descriptor of a type of enforcement. When people say "post-scrimmage kick foul" they mean a foul subject to post-scrimmage kick enforcement which could occur before or after a scrimmage kick is actually executed..
-
The definition of 'Post-Scrimmage Kick' refers to a set of conditions used to determine a special enforcement rather than a specific foul. For the 'Post-Scrimmage Kick' definition to be applicible, all of the conditions have to be met at some time during the down. This means some of the conditions can be met prior to, or after the actual foul and at least ONE of the conditions (the one requiring that K is not the next to put the ball in play) must happen after the foul.
Where we sometimes confuse ourselves is by referring to a foul as a "'Post-Scrimmage Kick' foul" when actually it is a "foul that occured in the midst of all 'Post-Scrimmage Kick' conditions being met".
My only real beef with the PSK definition is the fact that they've included the prefix "post-" unnecessarily. It implies a specific time frame that isn't accurate for when the conditions can be met.
-
Right, it's a "special enforcement of a foul that occured during a scrimmage kick down, when four specific conditions have been met".
But that would make the rule book 3 pages longer.
-
But that would make the rule book 3 pages longer.
That's never stopped them before! LOL
-
The definition of 'Post-Scrimmage Kick' refers to a set of conditions used to determine a special enforcement rather than a specific foul. For the 'Post-Scrimmage Kick' definition to be applicible, all of the conditions have to be met at some time during the down. This means some of the conditions can be met prior to, or after the actual foul and at least ONE of the conditions (the one requiring that K is not the next to put the ball in play) must happen after the foul.
Great explanation.
-
REPLY: RickKY...I can't help it, but I break out in hives when I hear PSK described in terms of possession changing before it really has. Mainly because I fear it will confuse the newer guys. Possession isn't really a factor in PSK except for one place: Once possession changes, a legal scrimmage kick ends and there's no more possibility for a PSK enforceable foul.
Let's summarize this way...a foul by R enforceable under PSK may occur anytime between the snap and the end of the kick. That interval is what people have been calling the "window" for PSK. Now there are still other criteria that must be met, namely: foul (by R) must occur beyond the ENZ; the kick must cross the ENZ, but doesn't need to remain there; at the conclusion of the down, K must not be entitled to next put the ball in play. Though the Fed doesn't like to say it, PSK is an exception to the regular enforcement rules for fouls during a loose ball play.
Bob, I would agree with everything you stated above. Possession really is not issue for PSK, but the exception was instituted because K has decided to give up possession by choosing to kick the ball away. That is why we now enforce the foul as PSK instead of as a previous spot loose ball foul.