Author Topic: Kicker gets rocked on onside kick (Read 16036 times)

BoBo · « **on:** September 28, 2012, 11:08:30 AM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wpzsm7p33js&feature=youtu.be

Golfdock · « **Reply #1 on:** September 28, 2012, 11:40:07 AM »

Rule 6-1-9 states "The kicker of a free kick may not be blocked until he has advanced five yards beyond his restraining line or the kick has touched a player, an official or the ground." So this doesn't apply. What are your thoughts on the call?

Diablo · « **Reply #2 on:** September 28, 2012, 12:16:15 PM »

Quote from: Golfdock on September 28, 2012, 11:40:07 AM

Rule 6-1-9 states "The kicker of a free kick may not be blocked until he has advanced five yards beyond his restraining line or the kick has touched a player, an official or the ground." So this doesn't apply. What are your thoughts on the call?

I think the crew is calling the hit a personal foul (unnecessary roughness), not an 6-1-9 infraction.

But, I'm not sure about the crew's penalty enforcement. R announces 15 yard penalty, first down for Utah State (the offending-receiving team). Play-by-play reads the next down as first and 10 for Utah State at USU-45.
Shouldn't that penalty be enforced at the previous spot and replay the down?

BoBo · « **Reply #3 on:** September 28, 2012, 12:54:53 PM »

live ball treated as dead ball

TxSkyBolt · « **Reply #4 on:** September 28, 2012, 01:16:50 PM »

No way. This is a live ball PF during a free kick. Basic spot is previous spot. Cannot "tack-off" fouls by receiving team.

JasonTX · « **Reply #5 on:** September 28, 2012, 02:01:53 PM »

Quote from: BoBo on September 28, 2012, 12:54:53 PM

live ball treated as dead ball

No such thing as live ball treated as dead ball when the foul is a personal foul. 7 guys and we can't get the penalty correct? Go back to basics and walk youreself through this and you'll get it right.

Kalle · « **Reply #6 on:** September 28, 2012, 03:38:27 PM »

I wonder how they managed to screw this one up. Live ball personal foul by team B during a free kick, enforcement is governed by rule 10-2-2-d-4-a. 15 yards from the previous spot, team A FK from A-50.

kerryman71 · « **Reply #7 on:** September 28, 2012, 09:07:44 PM »

Did they have a guest student commentator from the chess club or something? (Not that there's anything wrong with chess)

John

NoVaBJ · « **Reply #8 on:** September 28, 2012, 11:35:51 PM »

Quote from: kerryman71 on September 28, 2012, 09:07:44 PM

Did they have a guest student commentator from the chess club or something? (Not that there's anything wrong with chess)

Chess actually has a thicker rulebook than football, believe it or not.

--Associate National Tournament Director, United States Chess Federation

110 · « **Reply #9 on:** September 29, 2012, 07:45:25 AM »

Quote from: NoVaBJ on September 28, 2012, 11:35:51 PM

Chess actually has a thicker rulebook than football, believe it or not.

--Associate National Tournament Director, United States Chess Federation

Used to be a tourney player in my youth. Can't imagine chess having that many rules, to be honest.

dvasques · « **Reply #10 on:** September 29, 2012, 10:26:43 AM »

I don't know about the rest of the game after that but the video ends right after the officials blow the whole thing dead before the snap...
maybe someone realized what happened and corrected it

Kalle · « **Reply #11 on:** September 29, 2012, 12:35:29 PM »

Quote from: dvasques on September 29, 2012, 10:26:43 AM

maybe someone realized what happened and corrected it

I hope so - I would assume the team A coach was pretty livid.

Diablo · « **Reply #12 on:** September 29, 2012, 02:33:52 PM »

Quote from: dvasques on September 29, 2012, 10:26:43 AM

I don't know about the rest of the game after that but the video ends right after the officials blow the whole thing dead before the snap...
maybe someone realized what happened and corrected it

This play-by-play
http://espn.go.com/ncf/playbyplay?gameId=322660036&period=4
has Utah St putting the ball in play 1/10 @ their own 45 with 1:43 in the fourth quarter.

TXMike · « **Reply #13 on:** September 30, 2012, 11:38:57 AM »

Wonder why this one and all other videos of this play are now UNAVAILABLE on youtube?

fencewire · « **Reply #14 on:** September 30, 2012, 01:17:50 PM »

just watched again from the link in the OP with no issues.

TXMike · « **Reply #15 on:** September 30, 2012, 01:24:06 PM »

Weird! That link and everyone like it showed "Unavailable" message awhile ago

allen · « **Reply #16 on:** October 01, 2012, 03:58:22 PM »

Mike, what's your take on this? Good flag?

TXMike · « **Reply #17 on:** October 01, 2012, 04:40:18 PM »

I think the definition of "defenseless player" is getting wider and wider each week. It certainly does not look like the Team B player led with the helmet although the 2 helmets did make contact. If that kicker had been on Team B and a Team A blocker hit him like that, would we flag? If that kicker had been a ball carrier and a tackler hit him like that, would we flag?

Monday morning QB I say no flag. At that moment, seeing those helmets hit and with all the pressure on everyone to flag "targeting", I can understand the flag.

Etref · « **Reply #18 on:** October 01, 2012, 05:30:50 PM »

Most coaches have adopted the "defenseless player" is only one of their players. All other teams cannot be a defenseless player...................

zebra99 · « **Reply #19 on:** October 02, 2012, 10:20:28 AM »

I believe this is a foul. You don't have to be a defenseless player. Sure looks like he's using the crown of his helmet to target, especially when he goes upstairs.

TXMike · « **Reply #20 on:** October 02, 2012, 10:26:15 AM »

Are you saying that hits with the shoulder, forearm, etc that are high on someone other than a defenseless player are fouls? I agree 100% if you judge the hitter used his helmet, you have a foul, regardless of who he hits. But hits, not using the helmet, that happen to be high on a ball carrier, blocker, potenial tackler, etc?

zebra99 · « **Reply #21 on:** October 02, 2012, 10:46:45 AM »

Quote from: TXMike on October 02, 2012, 10:26:15 AM

Are you saying that hits with the shoulder, forearm, etc that are high on someone other than a defenseless player are fouls? I agree 100% if you judge the hitter used his helmet, you have a foul, regardless of who he hits. But hits, not using the helmet, that happen to be high on a ball carrier, blocker, potenial tackler, etc?

Nope - not saying that. I just think he used his helmet and hit the guy right in the chin. He actually went down a little bit then up into the chin with his helmet instead of staying down. It doesn't really matter what his hands/arms are doing. In this day and age "When, in question...". The fact that we're debating it means it's "in question". This would be supported by the vast majority of, if not all, the supervisors.

TXMike · « **Reply #22 on:** October 02, 2012, 10:51:35 AM »

I have no doubt it would be supported but the other side of that is...if it had NOT been flagged, would the covering officials have received a downgrade?

zebra99 · « **Reply #23 on:** October 02, 2012, 10:53:10 AM »

Quote from: TXMike on October 02, 2012, 10:51:35 AM

I have no doubt it would be supported but the other side of that is...if it had NOT been flagged, would the covering officials have received a downgrade?

yes, IMHO

110 · « **Reply #24 on:** October 02, 2012, 11:18:16 AM »

Here's my thought on a "defenceless" player. I'd deem that a player who by his own actions, or the actions of another, reduced his ability to sustain contact. I'd NOT deem it so to a player who by his own stupidity isn't ready to play football.

I'm out of touch with NFHS rules some five years, now, but I recall a "centre protection" clause for long snappers. Well, I occasionally have some coach tell his kid to hang their head for the entire play trying to induce a penalty. *facepalm*

Author Topic: Kicker gets rocked on onside kick (Read 16036 times)

Diablo

kerryman71

110

Diablo

110