"Many fans, as well as coaches, are not aware of that rule."

 

And, many officials.

Will we ever see kickoffs in the endzone returned? I've never understood this rule.

 

Here was the background on this rule. Somewhere in the U S about 3-4 years ago, there were numerous personal fouls and unsportmanship penalties against the defense that were enforced on the kickoff so K was kicking off from about their opponents 25 yard line. So K's coach ordered his team to kick the ball deep over the goal line and while the ball is still in the air pay back the R for the personal fouls.

Of course somebody got hurt who got a lawyer who got a settlement which changed the rule about killing the ball once it crosses the goal line on a free kick.

I don't see that rule changing soon.

Here was the background on this rule. Somewhere in the U S about 3-4 years ago, there were numerous personal fouls and unsportmanship penalties against the defense that were enforced on the kickoff so K was kicking off from about their opponents 25 yard line. So K's coach ordered his team to kick the ball deep over the goal line and while the ball is still in the air pay back the R for the personal fouls.

Of course somebody got hurt who got a lawyer who got a settlement which changed the rule about killing the ball once it crosses the goal line on a free kick.

I don't see that rule changing soon.

That's got to be the stupidest thing I ever heard of. Why didn't they come up with an ejection and suspension rule instead, if that was going on? I can't believe it was happening that much, and the coaches and players should have been punished if it was. Instead, everyone gets punished.

The facts are a bit distorted...

 

No where in modern high school footbal history (at least in 17 years!) has R been allowed to return a kick out of its own endzone. For that matter, no one has ever been allowed to do anything when a kick went into the endzone--it is and has always been a touchback.

 

The rule changed talked about was, in most opinions, a very minor one. The rule used to say that the ball was officially dead once that kicked touched anything beyond the goal line even though, for practical reasons, the ball was basically dead once it crossed the plane. It just wasn't officially dead. The above posts imply that just 4 years the R could return kicks out of the endzone and that rule was changed because of some strange situation with personal fouls. That's just not factual.

 

All the rule change did was state the kick was dead just as soon as it broke the plane of the goal line instead of when the ball actually touched something beyond the goal line. It makes sense to kill the play when the ball breaks the plane of the goal since it is going to be a touchback anyway. That's all the rule change did. It stops the play when it should be stopped and, thus, helps to avoid injury.

 

FBRULES

Here was the background on this rule....which changed the rule about killing the ball once it crosses the goal line on a free kick.

I don't see that rule changing soon.

 

Thank you for clarifying my discussion in a better fashion, FB rules. I was discussing the ball dead as soon as the ball crossing the goal line versus R returning it out of the end zone. You are correct that R cannot return it out for at least the 17 years. I will add 2 more years and say since 1986 to my knowledge.

The facts are a bit distorted...

 

No where in modern high school footbal history (at least in 17 years!) has R been allowed to return a kick out of its own endzone. For that matter, no one has ever been allowed to do anything when a kick went into the endzone--it is and has always been a touchback.

I guess I'm even more confused now. Why are returns not allowed? For the reason jimmyref gave? Why are interceptions allowed to be returned from the endzone?

I'm not sure there is an official theory or reason. I think, more than anything else, it's just a long standing rule. It's just like there was never overtime in football for the most part on all levels until the last 25 years and college and NFL even later than that.

 

Your question is probably better suited for someone at the National Federation than those of us who simply enforce it.

Your question is probably better suited for someone at the National Federation than those of us who simply enforce it.

Don't think that I'm blaming you (refs) or the KHSAA for this silliness.

 

I was thinking when I played that you could return a kick from the endzone. Of course that was so long ago, I don't think anyone could kick the rock into the endzone. And when I say rock, I mean granite. It was tough playing in the stone age.

I think the logic is that the rule has been there for so long, and until more recent years, most kickers could not ever reach the GL with a free kick anyway, so it was never an issue. On punts and FG attempts the same rule applies. Once any free kick or scrimmage kick crooses the plane of the GL it is a touchback (unless it is a successful scoring kick) in all high school (NFHS) games.

 

I think eventually this rule will be changed, and you will see it be "tested" in a few states before being adopted nationwide. It gets more discussion every year from fans , and someone will propose it eventually.

 

Kicks in the EZ in NCAA and NFL can only be returned if they are caught. Once they touch something (ground, goal post, fence, etc.) behind the GL they are TB's.

As for the receiver and defender behind the NZ on a pass behind the NZ...

 

Neither an A nor a B player may hold an opponent in the backfield before, during or after a pass. They may not block from behind or below the waist either. All these are fouls regardless of the type of play being attempted.

 

However, blocking legally (from front or sides, above waist) before the ball arrives is legal if the contact occurs before the ball is touched if it is in or behind the NZ.

 

By rule, there is no pass interference on a pass in or behind the NZ, but only if the forward pass crosses the NZ. You can have other fouls though, such as illegal block or holding, or a personal foul.

But why did they kill the fumblerooski?

But why did they kill the fumblerooski?

 

Purely opinion here but they felt it was an attempt to deceive. Just like the "Lonely End" among others.

 

Big changes in college this year with the clock starting on change of possession after the ready for play and the clock starting on the kick during a kickoff.

A big misconception about high school football is the "chuck" rule which the NFL has. There is no chuck rule in HS football. The NFL rule says you have 5 yards to "chuck" a receiver who is coming of the line. You can not do that in HS football. The HS rule basically says as soon as the eligible receiver establishes a route he can not be touched. Many fans, as well as coaches, are not aware of that rule.

 

 

A receiver comes off the line of scrimmage. At what point has he "established a route?" How does a db know if the guy is coming to block him or is going to fake and run a true route?

The interpretation has generally been once he (an eligible receiver) makes a move, a cut if you will, to run a passing type pattern then he's no longer blocking for the guy with the ball..

 

We're not talking about players on offense coming out to block the defense. We're talking about players on defense initiating contact with an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker. The responsibility for this foul is on the defense.

 

A blocker is someone who is contacting the opponent to keep them from getting after the runner, the guy with the ball. The foul prohibits the defense from making contact against an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker. Thus, if an eligible receiver comes off the line and turns or simply starts going out for a pass, and its pretty clear that's it's a passing play, then the defense must avoid contact. The line is rarely gray on this one.

 

To answer the question posed, I would think the DB would know the difference based on the criteria I just gave. It is up for him to know and most of them are pretty smart. The "how was I supposed to know" defense just doesn't work. That's like saying how was I supposed to know the guy I just knocked into the stands 30 yards away from the play was obviously no longer in the play? Or, if a DB is concentrating on the guy he's covering how is he supposed to know the pass was in the air so he could not interfere? He's supposed to know because he's a smart player who is paying attention to his surroundings and what's going on and knows what is allowed to do or not allowed to do by rule.

I should probably add the one of the reasons this foul is rare is because most defensive backs do "know" and play accordingly.