PROP Approved Rules changes - now we wait for the UIL

[ElvisLives]

Surely it will not be written this way.

It already is. That's what I'm telling y'all. Really not hard for us to officiate as it is, but is it good for football? I hope the coaches come to their senses, and insist on fixing this. And then seek some true expert help with editing the rule. Not sure they have a real expert, at the moment.

[dammitbobby]

There's a draft revision making the rounds that adds the following verbiage at the end:

(Note: This rule is not intended to prevent a defensive player from pursuing a runner or loose ball during a fake or broken play)

[copedaddy]

I do not see that "note" on the copy from the TASO site.

[ElvisLives]

I do not see that "note" on the copy from the TASO site.

That was a “note” of intent that was included with an earlier preliminary (published) iteration of the rule. That doesn’t appear in the final published Exceptions document.

I’m hoping, but not counting on, further modifications. As it is, IMHO, the rule is not good for football. Conceived with good intentions, but poorly executed.

[dammitbobby]

On FB, TxMike said there would be a revision before the season started.

[copedaddy]

Hopefully not 2 days before he first season games. LoL

[FWREF]

Ok, here is 58 in it's entirety: If Team A is in a scrimmage kick formation to attempt a place kick (field goal or try), it is illegal for a
defensive player who is not in a three or four point stance and aligned in a stationary position within one
yard of his line of scrimmage when the ball was snapped, to enter the neutral zone and initiate contact
(indicated by forward movement of the defensive player) with an offensive player in or behind the
neutral zone. Incidental or slight contact should be ignored. EXCEPTION: there is no foul under this rule
after a change of team possession, however other personal foul rules may apply.
PENALTY – Personal Foul, 15 yards and automatic first down. So if i am reading this correctly and i believe this is Robert's point. No contact with with the offense is permitted by restricted players on a FG or try. This would apply to muffs, fumbles, fakes, etc??? So Team A in a place kick formation can snap the ball to the holder, he can stand up and scan the field and look for receivers far as long as he wants, without the defense being able to rush him or make contact. The exception to this being that non restricted lineman could rush but that would normally be limited to 3 or 4 guys against the entire offense. I mean what???!!! Who thought/ thinks this would be a good idea? Am i missing something?

[dammitbobby]

The (non-TASO version I have seen had this appended to the end of the exception:

(Note: This rule is not intended to prevent a defensive player from pursuing a runner or loose ball during a fake or broken play)

While not... elegant, it would seemingly address the issue you bring up.

That said - in its current form, yes, it's essentially a free play for the offense, IMO

[copedaddy]

Fresh off Face Book from Mike Wise

The revised Exc 58-  58. UIL RULE - PERSONAL FOUL ON FIELD GOALS AND TRY ATTEMPTS (Additional rule applicable to UIL games only)
When the offensive team attempts a place kick (field goal or try), it is illegal for a defensive player who is  not in a three or four point stance in a stationary position within one yard of his line of scrimmage when the ball was snapped, to enter the neutral zone and initiate forcible contact (indicated by forward movement of the defensive player) with an opponent in or behind the neutral zone.  Incidental or slight  contact should be ignored.  EXCEPTION: There is no foul under this rule if the contact is after it is obvious the place kick will not be attempted, or the place kick attempt has been blocked; however other personal foul rules may apply.
PENALTY – Personal Foul, 15 yards and automatic first down. [S38]

Looks to be about the same as it was before. Its just football with a little restriction. I think Robert nailed it on the head in an earlier post on this thread.

[dammitbobby]

Been thinking on this.

Try, B38 is a linebacker lined up on the edge, upright (i.e., restricted.) At the snap, he rushes across the line untouched, and lays out to block the kick.

1) B38 knocks over the holder before he blocks the ball.

2) B38 blocks the ball, then knocks over the holder.

For me, 1) is either PF/UNR or running into the holder foul (9-1-16-a-2), but also also an Exception 58 violation. So there's essentially no way to have a 5-yard foul for running into the kicker/holder with the new exception, is that correct? If the contact is before the block, or there is no block, it's now automatically a personal foul?

2) No foul for exception 58, but could have a foul for roughing or running into the holder.

Essentially exception 58 is null if the kick is blocked first.

Is that correct?

[Cosmokramer1]

Fresh off Face Book from Mike Wise

The revised Exc 58-  58. UIL RULE - PERSONAL FOUL ON FIELD GOALS AND TRY ATTEMPTS (Additional rule applicable to UIL games only)
When the offensive team attempts a place kick (field goal or try), it is illegal for a defensive player who is  not in a three or four point stance in a stationary position within one yard of his line of scrimmage when the ball was snapped, to enter the neutral zone and initiate forcible contact (indicated by forward movement of the defensive player) with an opponent in or behind the neutral zone.  Incidental or slight  contact should be ignored.  EXCEPTION: There is no foul under this rule if the contact is after it is obvious the place kick will not be attempted, or the place kick attempt has been blocked; however other personal foul rules may apply.
PENALTY – Personal Foul, 15 yards and automatic first down. [S38]

Looks to be about the same as it was before. Its just football with a little restriction. I think Robert nailed it on the head in an earlier post on this thread.

With the TASO test released, there's a test question out there:
Team A attempts a FG from the B-10, 4th and Goal. B22 is standing upright 2 yards beyond the neutral zone. He waits one second after the snap and then attempts an outside rush towards the holder to block the kick. He ends making forcible contact with A15, a wingback in the backfield. Kick sails wide left. Result of the play will be:

So after reading what everyone has said the UIL exception has been updated, why is the correct answer:?
C) Foul on B22. After penalty is accepted it will be 1st and goal at the B-5.

What am I missing given the play described has the defensive player specifically 2 yards back? 

[dammitbobby]

Because he was not in a 3 or 4-point stance, within 1 yard of the LOS, he cannot rush in with contact, period. As written, it doesn't matter if he is 2 yards back or 10 yards back, he cannot initiate contact at all unless it is clear and obvious there will be no kick. He's essentially out of the play until that occurs. There is no one-Mississippi rushing rule, so to speak.

[Cosmokramer1]

Because he was not in a 3 or 4-point stance, within 1 yard of the LOS, he cannot rush in with contact, period. As written, it doesn't matter if he is 2 yards back or 10 yards back, he cannot initiate contact at all unless it is clear and obvious there will be no kick. He's essentially out of the play until that occurs. There is no one-Mississippi rushing rule, so to speak.

Thanks, Michael.  Forest through the trees for me on that one.