Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cyb-eng.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hao!seismo!ut-sally!oakhill!cyb-eng!ables From: ables@cyb-eng.UUCP (King Ables) Newsgroups: net.sport.football Subject: Re: new football play proposal Message-ID: <479@cyb-eng.UUCP> Date: Thu, 20-Dec-84 14:08:18 EST Article-I.D.: cyb-eng.479 Posted: Thu Dec 20 14:08:18 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 23-Dec-84 01:48:55 EST References: <11360@brunix.UUCP> Organization: Cyb Systems, Austin, TX Lines: 20 A short kick designed to bounce off of a defensive man as described might work now and then, admittedly, the chances are better when the punting team is watching for a short kick and a fumble, but trying to kick the ball and have it hit one guy out of that whole area (22 guys in a 50x50 yard area probably isn't all that easy) seems unlikely enough that at least I wouldn't try it unless I were *Really* desperate. As for the ruling on the play, it would be a change of posession (the receiving team has to have possession of it in order to call it a fumble if it touches them, right?). I'm not sure when possession changes (at the top of the arc, when the ball leaves the punter's foot, or when the receiver touches or catches it) but if it touches the receiver and then the punting team covers it and you say there wasn't a change of possession, you couldn't call it a fumble, either. Q.E.D. :-) -King ARPA: ables%cyb-eng.UUCP@ut-sally.ARPA UUCP: ...{ctvax,gatech,ihnp4,nbires,seismo,ucb-vax}!ut-sally!cyb-eng!ables