Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10
31
National Federation Discussion / Re: Crazy play...what ya got?
« Last post by KWH on June 11, 2021, 03:02:39 PM »
So, what covers the Annexation of Puerto Rico play???
NFHS Rule 7-2-8 (S-19) - 5 Yards and Casebook 7.2.8 SITUATION
32
National Federation Discussion / Re: Punt play...what ya got?
« Last post by KWH on June 11, 2021, 02:54:09 PM »
Why not allow a fair catch on a pop-up kick like the NCAA does? This would agree with the fundamental that no foul can cause a live ball to become dead, because the kick would remain live, and it would remove the unfair advantage the defense has in being able to recover a ball that is apparently lobbed into the air by taking advantage of the fact that fair-catch rules no longer apply, and hitting the kick receiver.

Why?
Because the Rules Committees goal was to remove the Pop-Up Kick and have it exit the game in the same manner as the Return Kick!
I believe they achieved their goal.
33
National Federation Discussion / Re: Punt play...what ya got?
« Last post by ilyazhito on June 10, 2021, 01:44:50 PM »
Why not allow a fair catch on a pop-up kick like the NCAA does? This would agree with the fundamental that no foul can cause a live ball to become dead, because the kick would remain live, and it would remove the unfair advantage the defense has in being able to recover a ball that is apparently lobbed into the air by taking advantage of the fact that fair-catch rules no longer apply, and hitting the kick receiver.
34
National Federation Discussion / Re: Crazy play...what ya got?
« Last post by ilyazhito on June 10, 2021, 01:42:26 PM »
The Annexation of Puerto Rico is the name that Little Giants uses for the Fumblerooski.
35
National Federation Discussion / Re: Crazy play...what ya got?
« Last post by Ralph Damren on June 10, 2021, 11:08:05 AM »
Ralph please correct me if I am wrong but...
Isn't the Annexation of Puerto Rico play when there is an official complaint that Big ole Bubba's mom is once again
encompassing more than her allotted seat space in the grandstands ?
I believe that is considered a violation of the 6 feet social distancing rule. ??? However, one could argue that the spirit of that rule is to measure the distance from one's face and not one's...err..lower beam. ;). In our football world, we could consider it butt blocking - 15 yards from the spot of the foul.
 tiphat:
36
National Federation Discussion / Re: Crazy play...what ya got?
« Last post by KWH on June 10, 2021, 11:00:00 AM »
So, what covers the Annexation of Puerto Rico play???

Ralph please correct me if I am wrong but...
Isn't the Annexation of Puerto Rico play when there is an official complaint that Big ole Bubba's mom is once again
encompassing more than her allotted seat space in the grandstands ?
37
National Federation Discussion / Re: Punt play...what ya got?
« Last post by CalhounLJ on June 10, 2021, 10:39:48 AM »
Well, I understand that, but really, it speaks to my point. Until the pop-up kick, it was virtually impossible to "illegally" kick the ball on a kickoff. But, since the advent of the pop-up, now we need to distinguish between a legal kick versus an illegal kick. That, plus the fact that we have to wait to see if the kick will become illegal or stay legal, and then effectually stop the play by blowing the whistle just seems to go against the grain of fundamental football.

I don't have a problem with the safety aspect of this foul, and when it comes down to it, I'm sure you all did the very best you could to come to a sensible solution. Your job is difficult, and I appreciate you for it.
38
National Federation Discussion / Re: Punt play...what ya got?
« Last post by KWH on June 10, 2021, 10:10:56 AM »
I get it. But still, the foul doesnít happen until the ball is kicked , and the down begins when the ball is snapped or kicked. So we have in essence done what you just scolded Ralph not to do. But Iím not mad.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

2-7-1...A down is action which starts with a legal snap (beginning a scrimmage down) or when the ball is legally kicked (beginning a free-kick down) A down ends when the ball next becomes dead.

While the word legally is not in the current 2021 Rules Book, it certainly should be and my Chrystal ball is telling me it will likely appear in the 2022 Rules Book as that is clearly the intent of the Rules Committee.
My same old Chrystal ball is indicating Ralph would likely support adding this additional word to 2-7-1.
39
National Federation Discussion / Re: Crazy play...what ya got?
« Last post by SCHSref on June 10, 2021, 09:49:53 AM »
While I agree with my good friend KWH (the author of the rule outlawing the Oregonian Flea-Flicker) that applying 9-9-1 to this play would be a stretch, I think we all would agree that a big ole' Bubba running onto the field to make a TD saving tackle would be a TD via 9-9-1. Yet it ,too, is covered by 9-6-4a. Other situations that could occur of FG attempts come to my demented mind :
(1) R10 brings a long-broom and stands under the goal post ,waving it wildly = USC on coach (9-8-1h);
(2) R9, from a family of tightrope walkers, climbs up and onto crossbar, waving arms wildly = IP (9-6-2c).

Several years ago we put in a rule covering "the play of the pregnant fullback" (9-9-3). No one had ever seen/heard of it happening, but it could. Same with  9-6-4e. IMHO, if we tried to list everything that could happen, we would miss something that a creative coach would come up with. IMHO, 9-9-1 gives us a common sense approach to plays where the penalty doesn't fit the crime  P_S . IMHO, the word "..specific.." gives us that latitude if the illegal act   cost the opponents a score. IMHO, if we all had the same opinion it would be a very boring forum  yEs: !

So, what covers the Annexation of Puerto Rico play???
40
National Federation Discussion / Re: Crazy play...what ya got?
« Last post by Ralph Damren on June 10, 2021, 07:51:21 AM »
While I agree with my good friend KWH (the author of the rule outlawing the Oregonian Flea-Flicker) that applying 9-9-1 to this play would be a stretch, I think we all would agree that a big ole' Bubba running onto the field to make a TD saving tackle would be a TD via 9-9-1. Yet it ,too, is covered by 9-6-4a. Other situations that could occur of FG attempts come to my demented mind :
(1) R10 brings a long-broom and stands under the goal post ,waving it wildly = USC on coach (9-8-1h);
(2) R9, from a family of tightrope walkers, climbs up and onto crossbar, waving arms wildly = IP (9-6-2c).

Several years ago we put in a rule covering "the play of the pregnant fullback" (9-9-3). No one had ever seen/heard of it happening, but it could. Same with  9-6-4e. IMHO, if we tried to list everything that could happen, we would miss something that a creative coach would come up with. IMHO, 9-9-1 gives us a common sense approach to plays where the penalty doesn't fit the crime  P_S . IMHO, the word "..specific.." gives us that latitude if the illegal act   cost the opponents a score. IMHO, if we all had the same opinion it would be a very boring forum  yEs: !
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10