UNI post game thoughts (Version 2)

[EndZoneQB]

Anyone else think PGT may have played his best game?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Honestly, it looked like something clicked for him. He was all over the field and couldn't be happier for him!

[89MTBISON]

Once we touched the ball, he had nothing to lose by picking up the ball. It doesn't matter if he waved fair catch or not.

I think that's why CJ couldn't advance the ball against MT on one of his returns, he waved people off, that's interpreted as a fair catch signal.

[NorthernBison]

Once we touched the ball, he had nothing to lose by picking up the ball. It doesn't matter if he waved fair catch or not.

Yes and no. They couldn't lose the ball but it does matter if he waved. Any wave to tell people to get away that wasn't a valid fair catch signal would prevent him from advancing the ball. So would a valid fair catch signal.

Both stop protecting him once the ball hits the ground and both prevent the receiving team from advancing the ball.

If no signal is made and the kicking team touches the ball, the receiving team can advance it at no risk of loss as they have the right to take it where it was touched regardless of what happens after.

[IndyBison]

The receiving team has the choice of taking it at any spot of illegal touching. Let's say the Bison touched it at the 1 and then again at the 5, they wound chose the 5.

There is still some risk for the receiving team. They lose the option of illegal touching if they commit a foul after the touching or any foul against the kicking team is accepted. For example if touching happens at the B35 and during the return the hold at B38, they don't get the option of the touching spot. Or if they fumble after committing the hold and the kicking team recovered, the penalty we'll be declined, touching option no longer exists and kicking team gets first and ten.

The risk is low but it does still exist.

[NorthernBison]

I just learned something. Thank you.

[CAS4127]

I just learned something. Thank you.

Is it really called "illegal touching"? What's "illegal" about it. It's just touching isn't it?


Sent from my iPhone.

[1998braves64]

Is it really called "illegal touching"? What's "illegal" about it. It's just touching isn't it?


Sent from my iPhone.

Depends on who you're touching, CAS, being a lawyer and all I'd think you'd know that by now.

I think illegal is just described as the kicking team cannot possess the ball because of touching it at that point? Not really sure. Or maybe it is only used in certain situations.

[IndyBison]

Is it really called "illegal touching"? What's "illegal" about it. It's just touching isn't it?

Great question. I have no idea. Interestingly NFHS calls it first touching and NCAA calls it illegal touching. Neither involve flags but should be marked with a bean bag. I would guess it's illegal because it's different from legal touching.

It also applies on a free kick if touching is done by the kicking team in the neutral zone (10 yards on a free kick) before it is touched by the receiving team. If the kicking team touches it at the A42 and it's recovered by either team at the A47, the receiving team will take it at the A42. If the kicking team touches it first at the A47, then it would be legal touching.

[missingnumber7]

Great question. I have no idea. Interestingly NFHS calls it first touching and NCAA calls it illegal touching. Neither involve flags but should be marked with a bean bag. I would guess it's illegal because it's different from legal touching.

It also applies on a free kick if touching is done by the kicking team in the neutral zone (10 yards on a free kick) before it is touched by the receiving team. If the kicking team touches it at the A42 and it's recovered by either team at the A47, the receiving team will take it at the A42. If the kicking team touches it first at the A47, then it would be legal touching.

Its because the rules book was written by lawyers that want to screw with people.

[CAS4127]

Its because the rules book was written by lawyers that want to screw with people.

So the book was written by lawyers but rules weren't?

See how we are?


Sent from my iPhone.