Should icing the kicker be banned?

[bravos1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Should the rules with this issue be altered instead of banned?

For example, should coaches be limited to one timeout in these "icing" situation? Should they be unable to call timeout after the kicking is fully set (all players down, holder set, kicker all the way back in formation)? Any other changes?

[/ QUOTE ]

I favor the defense is NOT allowed to call timeout once the offense is fully set. This is for all plays, not just kicking plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

so then you should make one the other way as well right? no offensive TOs if the defense is ready too right? Come on!

[jogsxyz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Should the rules with this issue be altered instead of banned?

For example, should coaches be limited to one timeout in these "icing" situation? Should they be unable to call timeout after the kicking is fully set (all players down, holder set, kicker all the way back in formation)? Any other changes?

[/ QUOTE ]

I favor the defense is NOT allowed to call timeout once the offense is fully set. This is for all plays, not just kicking plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

so then you should make one the other way as well right? no offensive TOs if the defense is ready too right? Come on!

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely not. Like basketball, the offense has more options to call timeout.

[jogsxyz]

Defense was never required to be set. Only not allowed across the neutral zone. Not even a penalty if they return before the snap.

[bravos1]

[ QUOTE ]
Defense was never required to be set. Only not allowed across the neutral zone. Not even a penalty if they return before the snap.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you are saying that if the defense realized that it only had 10 players.. it could not call a timeout just because the offense was "ready"? I could see it now.. if you are playing Indy and they are running the no huddle, you'd basically never be able to call a timeout unless it was right after a play..

[jogsxyz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Defense was never required to be set. Only not allowed across the neutral zone. Not even a penalty if they return before the snap.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you are saying that if the defense realized that it only had 10 players.. it could not call a timeout just because the offense was "ready"? I could see it now.. if you are playing Indy and they are running the no huddle, you'd basically never be able to call a timeout unless it was right after a play..

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, no problem. Why do they only have ten? How many did they have the previous play?
One game this weekend. Can't remember which. One team had a lonesome end. Defense didn't notice. Coaches tried to call timeout, but were too slow. I wouldn't allow the timeout if I wrote the rules.

[Stellastarr]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm fine with "icing" the kicker... letting him setup, and calling timeout. It's the doing it so late that he kicks it I dislike.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly

[shipitkthx]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The old way was fine. It was never debated. I bet they just go back to the way it was.

[/ QUOTE ]Yep. It's only an issue because coming from the sideline. Just go back to old way. Makes no difference. If you can't communicate to players to call timeout for you, you suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how having a player do it is any diff? So a player stands right next tio the ref and does the same thing... same results.

What's next? Linebackers not allowed to move up to the line of scrimmage to fake blitz? "I'm sorry, you can not do that because we feel it gets into the QBs head to much"..LOL

BTW, the whole icing the kicker thing is WAY over-rated. These guys are pros, making them wait another 20 seconds is typically not going to do anything. To the people who REALLY think these guys are mentally/emotionally fragile..LMAO!

[/ QUOTE ]

This is so wrong its scary. Put yourself in the position of a kicker and think about what is in your line of site. You can see the defense in front of you. If a a defensive player leaves his position and starts signaling to the ref for a timeout, you are going to see it. When a coach is on the sideline standing next to a ref and signaling the timeout, this is completely out of your vision. Unless the defense wants to actually keep a player close to the sideline for the purpose of calling a timeout you cannot see, they could not accomplish the same thing as a coach. As I expressed earlier in this thread in a post that seemed to go unnoticed, my entire problem with this current practice is that the coaches aren't just stopping the play before it happens, they are INTENTIONALLY causing the play to happen twice by calling TO when they know the ref won't be able to stop the play from actually happening.

[Horacewinsagain]

[ QUOTE ]
the new rule yes. the old rule was fine when the defense had to call it. It's pure chickensh*t to let the coach wait until 2 seconds before the ball is snapped. The is no debate on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I saw the title of this thread and thought "HAH like we could ever ban that". However, I am kinda coming over to the side that wants there to be no defensive TO's called when the players are set. I have no idea why a coach is allowed to call a timeout either.

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's unethical, cheap or douchey. However, it should still be banned.

[/ QUOTE ]


So, the team that doesn't have the ball last is banned from using their full complement of timeouts? Interesting.

What if they have a player hurt?
Wrong guy on the field?
Wrong formation?
Too many men?

[Franchise 60]

I Agree that its def a Douche move, but I don't get how people say its doesn't give you an advantage when it has already changed the outcome of 2 games.

You don't think that it is harder to kick the second kick after you just kicked a 50 yarder and celebrated thinking you won? Obviously there will be a case where someone misses the first and makes the second attempt, but if this was to be allowed for the next ten years, there is no doubt in my mind that there would be far more cases of making first/missing 2nd than missing first/making 2nd.