First Touching

[Patrick E.]

K’s free kick is first touched by K1 at the K 45-yard line. The ball continues to the R48 where the kick is recovered by K2 at the R48. During the kick, R1 holds K3 at the K49.

If K accepts R1’s penalty, K will re-kick from the 50 – this is a loose ball play so the basic spot is the previous spot.

If K decline’s R1’s foul, it is R’s ball 1st and 10 at the K 45-yard line.

Is this correct?

[pjsaul]

Looks correct to me. R loses the option to take the ball at the spot of first touching only if they touch the ball and then commit a penalty (6-1-6).

We would ask K for their foul choice, and then ask R if they would like the ball at the spot of first touching or the result of the play (result of the play being a recovery by K). If K accepts the penalty, there is no option for R (also 6-1-6).

[ncwingman]

That sounds good, except there is an exceptionally unlikely third option.

If K declines the foul, R has the option to take the results of the play -- K's ball at the R48.

I think you have a better chance of winning the lottery while being eaten by a shark that's being struck by lightning, of course. I only bring that up because R is not obligated to take the ball at a spot of first touching, it is only an option they have.

[prab]

If K declines the foul, R has the option to take the results of the play -- K's ball at the R48.

I think you have a better chance of winning the lottery while being eaten by a shark that's being struck by lightning, of course.

All of that being said, if it still happens, YOU WILL BE BLAMED FOR NOT EXPLAINING R's OPTIONS WELL ENOUGH!!!!! 

[AlUpstateNY]

NFHS: 6-2-5 advises, "....The right of R to take the ball at the spot of first touching is cancelled if R touches the kick and thereafter during the down commits a foul OR if the penalty is accepted for ANY foul committed during the down.

It seems K choices are either accept R's holding penalty during the loose ball, resulting in a re-kick after a 10 yard penalty against R, or decline the penalty, which would eliminate the cancellation of the first touching privilege for R, allowing them to put the ball in play at K's 45 yl, as Patrick previously suggested

[ncwingman]

All of that being said, if it still happens, YOU WILL BE BLAMED FOR NOT EXPLAINING R's OPTIONS WELL ENOUGH!!!!!

Visiting team scores a touchdown.
Home team elects to kick off.
Above scenario happens.
Visiting team gives Home team the ball as the results of the play.

Home team then throws a pass and Visiting team is flagged for intentional pass interference, which caused the pass to go incomplete, except that it hit a dog that wandered out of the field.

Game is abandoned and everybody heads to the bar, because the world is clearly about to end.

[Ralph Damren]

NFHS: 6-2-5 advises, "....The right of R to take the ball at the spot of first touching is cancelled if R touches the kick and thereafter during the down commits a foul OR if the penalty is accepted for ANY foul committed during the down.

It seems K choices are either accept R's holding penalty during the loose ball, resulting in a re-kick after a 10 yard penalty against R, or decline the penalty, which would eliminate the cancellation of the first touching privilege for R, allowing them to put the ball in play at K's 45 yl, as Patrick previously suggested

IMHO, if R had touched the kick, Yankee Al would be right. In the OP it doesn't mention R touching the kick. IN 6-2-5 : " ...first touching is cancelled IF R touches the kick and thereafter during the down commits a foul...".

IMHO, K would decline the foul and take the ball at R's 48

IMHO, You would tell K's captain, not ask. Why put a kid in a position of possibly making a dumb choice?

IMHO, Sox sweep North of the Border....PENNANT FEVER

[Brian26]

IMHO, if R had touched the kick, Yankee Al would be right. In the OP it doesn't mention R touching the kick. IN 6-2-5 : " ...first touching is cancelled IF R touches the kick and thereafter during the down commits a foul...".

IMHO, K would decline the foul and take the ball at R's 48

IMHO, You would tell K's captain, not ask. Why put a kid in a position of possibly making a dumb choice?

IMHO, Sox sweep North of the Border....PENNANT FEVER

Wouldn't R have the ball at first touching by K at K's 45 if K decline the penalty?

[Atlanta Blue]

Wouldn't R have the ball at first touching by K at K's 45 if K decline the penalty?

No.  When R COMMITTED the foul, they lost the right to first touching.  The penalty does not have to be accepted, the foul itself takes away the right.

[AlUpstateNY]

IMHO, if R had touched the kick, Yankee Al would be right. In the OP it doesn't mention R touching the kick. IN 6-2-5 : " ...first touching is cancelled IF R touches the kick and thereafter during the down commits a foul...".

IMHO, Sox sweep North of the Border....PENNANT FEVER

Remember, it was a former (Great) Yankee catcher who reminded us, "It ain't over till it's over".

On the other hand exactly what part of NF 6-2-5, that states..." OR if the penalty is accepted for ANY foul committed during the down., am I misunderstanding?

[Atlanta Blue]

On the other hand exactly what part of NF 6-2-5, that states..." OR if the penalty is accepted for ANY foul committed during the down., am I misunderstanding?

Because here is the relevant part of the rule:

The right of R to take the ball at spot of first touching by K is canceled if R touches the kick and thereafter during the down commits a foul or if the penalty is accepted for any foul committed during the down.

Here is what Ralph has said the rule means:

The right of R to take the ball at spot of first touching by K is canceled if R touches the kick and (thereafter during the down commits a foul or if the penalty is accepted for any foul committed during the down.)

You are reading it like this:

The right of R to take the ball at spot of first touching by K is canceled (if R touches the kick and thereafter during the down commits a foul) or (if the penalty is accepted for any foul committed during the down. )

The phrase on which you are concentrating does not stand alone.  The first condition of R touching the ball must be followed by EITHER of the other two conditions for R to lose the right to first touching.
 

[CalhounLJ]

as usual, AB is right. R does not have to touch the ball to lose the right to a first-touching spot. If either team fouls and that penalty is accepted, the first-touching spot goes away and we enforce using all-but-one.

[ref4e]

as usual, AB is right. R does not have to touch the ball to lose the right to a first-touching spot. If either team fouls and that penalty is accepted, the first-touching spot goes away and we enforce using all-but-one.

I'm still missing something here.
If K takes the result of the play (that is, declines R's penalty), isn't R's right to take the ball at FT spot restored?
So, if K takes the result of the play, isn't R going to choose to take the ball at the FT spot (45)?

[Atlanta Blue]

I'm still missing something here.
If K takes the result of the play (that is, declines R's penalty), isn't R's right to take the ball at FT spot restored?
So, if K takes the result of the play, isn't R going to choose to take the ball at the FT spot (45)?

Yes, since R didn't touch the ball then commit a foul, if K decline's R's foul (which you should not let them do), R would get the ball at the spot of first touching.

[Brian26]

No.  When R COMMITTED the foul, they lost the right to first touching.  The penalty does not have to be accepted, the foul itself takes away the right.

Yes, since R didn't touch the ball then commit a foul, if K decline's R's foul (which you should not let them do), R would get the ball at the spot of first touching.

Not trying to beat a dead horse here, just want to make sure I understand it. Which of the two is correct?

[zoom]

Not trying to beat a dead horse here, just want to make sure I understand it. Which of the two is correct?

Both are correct.  In the first case, R touched the ball and subsequently fouled.  In the latter case, they fouled before touching it. 

[Brian26]

Yea thanks zoom. I went back and read through it again. I got confused (not hard to do) that there was two different scenarios. Sorry AB I can be a little slow at times  .