ConnorBeach

Jax - I see your point and agree that very well could be the case. I think all the confusion comes from the fact that 6-3-a is talking only about touching the ball but lists 6-4-1 as an exception which only talks about touching the player. It's not logical that touching a player is an exception to touching the ball.

Out of curiosity, I saw mention of a AL-TN situation like this last year. Was there ever anything put out about that ruling? I don't follow the SEC closely.

Thanks for the discussion. I think it's been interesting. Good luck this year! Shepard and Peterson are nasty!

You'd be surprised what former athletes know. Herbstreit is pretty good but most people only know what they've been involved in and what they've heard repeated. McNabb and overtime ring a bell? Very few of these announcers sit down and try to understand every aspect of a rule book. Read it, maybe. Understand it, rarely.

Mastr - no, it honestly doesn't help. :-)

I would blindly trust the majority of posters here before announcers. Musberger can't get even half the names right (including our freaking chancellor) with a name sheet right in front of him and a birdie in his ear. No way does he know the intricacies of the rule book.

Golfer - so how do we decide when they become "eligible"? we go to 6-1-3.

Jax- This is where it does seem to get confusing. 6-1-3-a-2 states criteria after which the ball can be touched and lists 6-4-1 as an exception. 6-4-1 is the section that says the receiver does not have protection in this scenario. The way I read it 6-1-2-g states blocking cannot occur until 6-1-3 is satisfied. 6-1-3-a-2 is satisfied by exception as a result of 6-4-1.

I'm saying they must be behind their "restraining line". This is what is 10 yards from where the ball is placed to be kicked. This is defined in 6-1.

Hey guys,
I know a lot of people are basing their opinion on the fact that the ball has to cross the "neutral zone" first and think the "neutral zone" means the 10 yards. This is incorrect. Read 2-17 (definitions). The "neutral zone" is only the "length of the ball". Offsides on a kickoff isn't called because the receiving team is in the neutral zone; it's because they are past their restraining line.

So... 6-4-1 is satisfied because the kick was beyond the neutral zone and touched the ground. This meets the first of the 3 criteria to terminate the opportunity to catch protection in 6-4-1-a and makes the contact legal. Kicking team recovery was clearly after receiving team contact so no illegal touching. The question of whether the player was blocked into the ball is a judgment call. However I think it would be difficult to argue that the touching was solely a result of being blocked and that the receiver was not making a play on the ball.

Full disclosure... I am a UNC fan but not trying to flame; just reasonably discuss.