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