Not always a touchback

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 12:24 am

This thought just popped into my head.

In the current rules if from kick-off the ball scatters into the kicking teams half a touchback is awarded.
Why not allow the receiving team the option of playing the ball from where it lands? I don't see this as being taken very often but it might make a surprise play once in a while.

Stands back and waits for his idea to be shot down in flames

Longshot · Post by **Longshot** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 12:44 am

Blitz is already powerfull...

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 7:42 am

House rule it. Can't see why anyone would take an onside kick instead of a touchback though. Can you?

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 8:04 am

This would be like the allow-any-trait-on-double-6's -rule: nothing wrong with it, but no-one would use it, so it'd simply be waste of ink on the rulebooks.
I'm not providing any proof for this, because I consider it unnecessary. I challenge you to provide one good reason why people would choose to leave the ball where it lands instead of taking a touchback. If you can't think of any, then IMO it is pretty clear that this would be a redundant ruling.

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 11:41 pm

[Editted out due to GROSS stupidity]

And Mestari, why would the "any trait on a double 6" be a waste of ink? What if you'd aleady had +ST twice already? You'd be wasting a 3rd roll. I know it's unlikely, but as an example, in our league one GR rolled double 5 for both his first 2 skills.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 11:47 pm

Darkson wrote:I can see teams like Skaven and WE quite liking this as they could get the ball behind the oppo's LOS, pick up the ball and support the ball carrier. Hell, it would have come in handy for me as a Norse coach a couple of times.

Erm, and why wouldn't you just run behind the oppo's LOS not pick up the ball (because you were already carrying it) and support the ball carrier?

Longshot · Post by **Longshot** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 12:04 am

Mestari wrote:This would be like the allow-any-trait-on-double-6's -rule: nothing wrong with it, but no-one would use it, so it'd simply be waste of ink on the rulebooks.
I'm not providing any proof for this, because I consider it unnecessary. I challenge you to provide one good reason why people would choose to leave the ball where it lands instead of taking a touchback. If you can't think of any, then IMO it is pretty clear that this would be a redundant ruling.

For informations: we have decided a allow-any-trait-on-double-1's-rule.
As this, it will be used.

i am waiting for a clear D66 kickoff table.

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 6:24 am

Marcus wrote: Erm, and why wouldn't you just run behind the oppo's LOS not pick up the ball (because you were already carrying it) and support the ball carrier?

Exactly. I can see no advantage being gained from having the ball in the opponents side compared to having it in the hands of one of your players.

Deathwing · Post by **Deathwing** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 3:04 pm

Agreed. Any player that could reach the loose ball could reach that same spot with the ball already in his hands.

McDeth · Post by **McDeth** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 3:14 pm

Well no situation can i imagine where this would be of benefit, when i could give the ball to any player risk free of any pick up failure.

Anthony_TBBF · Post by **Anthony_TBBF** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 3:47 pm

Especially with the amount of pick-ups I fail lately... ugh.

Mr. Sanity · Post by **Mr. Sanity** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 8:41 pm

A touchback is infinitely better than letting the ball lie on the opponent's side of the pitch. Starting with the ball in hand guranatees 1. No failed pickup roll. 2. A chance at a completion. 3. The ball will not be in a wide-open spot where your opponent can casually take possession during his turn in the event that you botched a roll and ended your turn before posessing the ball.

The advantages of letting the ball lie on the opponents side of the pitch are: ummm... let's see... ummm... nothing? Umm... Here's one that's really reaching: psychological warfare (you are so confident in your dice that you don't care about the risks of losing the ball when you should be recieving it)?

Bevan · Post by **Bevan** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 9:40 pm

It is theoretically possible for a ball placed close to the LOS and affected by bad kick to end up so far back in the kicking team's half than neither team could reach it. If I was playing Wood Elves against Dwarfs then I might (possibly) prefer to leave it there and rush several players down so that the Dwarf coach did not know which players would attempt to get the ball and so could not knock over all of them.

This situation is so rare that I don't think we need a rule to allow for it.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 10:37 pm

Why woudl you still elave it there to rush players to reach it. Would it not be better to just give it to one of your players and then rush him and some support down there to a better position?

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 11:07 pm

As you can see I've editted out my 2nds post due to my gross stupidity (though in my defense I'd only had 3hr kip in 36hrs

), however, i think I my have found a use, rare but there.

But I think I'll go and think about it a bit more before opening up myself to even more ridicule.

Talk Fantasy Football

Not always a touchback

Not always a touchback

When you might let the ball stay where it lands