2011 CFO Test

[ref6983]

Yes, but what does that have to do with the exception for an airborne player?

The ball being placed at the spot where it crosses the sideline is an exception for an airborne player. To be an exception, then it must be different from the fundamental rule. So, what's the fundamental rule, to which it is an exception?

The first part of 4-2-4d is the fundamental rule: "The most forward point of the ball when declared out of bounds between the goal lines is the point of forward progress" and tells us what to do when the runner steps out of bounds. This is always the spot, EXCEPT WHEN AN AIRBORNE PLAYER CROSSES THE SIDELINE. In this case, the ball is not spotted at the most forward point, it's spotted where the ball crossed.

Note that we see further support for answer "B" on question 24 in the language of 4-2-4a: "If a live ball is declared out of bounds and the ball does not cross a boundary line, it is out of bounds at the ball's most forward point when it was declared dead."

This seems to directly infer that when the ball crosses the sideline...put it there. And that's why we've always done it that way.

[Diablo]

Sometimes the player steps out of bounds and the ball has never crossed the sideline. The ball is then placed at the most forward point of the ball.

As has been asked previously in this thread ...
Visualize a grounded ball carrier approaching the sideline.  At the A-30, he begins tightroping inbounds while holding the ball in foul territory.  At the A-34, his left foot lands inbounds, immediately followed by his right foot stepping OB at the A-36 extended.  The ball in possession of ball carrier is over the extended A-36 when the ball carrier's  right foot landed OB.
Where do you spot the ball for the next down? 

[zebra99]

As has been asked previously in this thread ...
Visualize a grounded ball carrier approaching the sideline.  At the A-30, he begins tightroping inbounds while holding the ball in foul territory.  At the A-34, his left foot lands inbounds, immediately followed by his right foot stepping OB at the A-36 extended.  The ball in possession of ball carrier is over the extended A-36 when the ball carrier's  right foot landed OB.
Where do you spot the ball for the next down? 

A-36.  I know, I know what your response will be.  But let's just face the fact that we will not decide this technical question here no matter how many more posts are posted. 

Strange though - why hasn't this issue come up in the past when we we're "using the where it crossed the sideline."

I find it hard to beleive that we were wrong for all that time...................

[El Macman]

A-36.  I know, I know what your response will be.  But let's just face the fact that we will not decide this technical question here no matter how many more posts are posted. 

Strange though - why hasn't this issue come up in the past when we we're "using the where it crossed the sideline."

I find it hard to beleive that we were wrong for all that time...................

Concur, and we can stop flailing this horse - even though it still lives.

I suspect the reason it hasn't come up is the fact that the realistic (yardage) difference between the two concepts is relatively minor, and teams didn't know the difference - hell, apparently some of us didn't know the difference - so the issue didn't arise. It takes ambiguity via a written exam question to bring this out in the open.

[zebra99]

Concur, and we can stop flailing this horse - even though it still lives.

I suspect the reason it hasn't come up is the fact that the realistic (yardage) difference between the two concepts is relatively minor, and teams didn't know the difference - hell, apparently some of us didn't know the difference - so the issue didn't arise. It takes ambiguity via a written exam question to bring this out in the open.

well said ---

[Diablo]

I suspect the reason it hasn't come up is the fact that the realistic (yardage) difference between the two concepts is relatively minor, and teams didn't know the difference - hell, apparently some of us didn't know the difference - so the issue didn't arise.

But they say it's a game of inches. 
And it appears that 4-2-4-d was applied correctly on a fourth down play in the final minute of last year's Little Caesars Pizza Bowl.  See link to youtube video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvXErRp30Ak

BTW, FIU went on the kick a FG and win he game.

[zebra99]

But they say it's a game of inches. 
And it appears that 4-2-4-d was applied correctly on a fourth down play in the final minute of last year's Little Caesars Pizza Bowl.  See link to youtube video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvXErRp30Ak

BTW, FIU went on the kick a FG and win he game.

GREAT CLIP!   

[El Macman]

But they say it's a game of inches. 
And it appears that 4-2-4-d was applied correctly on a fourth down play in the final minute of last year's Little Caesars Pizza Bowl.  See link to youtube video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvXErRp30Ak

BTW, FIU went on the kick a FG and win he game.

Well, there it is. The exact play we've been discussing. Did the officials on the field and the the RO get it right? I danged sure think so.

Way to go, Diablo.

[Diablo]

Well, there it is. The exact play we've been discussing. Did the officials on the field and the the RO get it right? I danged sure think so.
Way to go, Diablo.

I'm just the messenger.  Thanks should go to Rom Gilbert and his overworked, under paid video clip capturer.

PS   I think that is an ACC crew.  Perhaps those boys have been enlightened to the intent of 4-2-4-d.

[Hursk]

Very illuminating discussion guys... having been one of those holding the opposite interpretation for years, I have to say that I'm persuaded that the "airborne v. running" distinction is the key under the text of the rules and AR's.  The interpretation also is in keeping with the underlying forward progress assumptions that must have been in place in the old TD AR's involving goal line extension, as well as this year's goal line extension "exceptions" in the TD AR's.

Don't know now whether to flag with that defender who, in an effort to stop forward progress, hits the runner over OB territory whose back foot has just left the ground inbounds and before his front foot hits the ground OB, but I guess that's for another day.

I'll go back to my lurking...

[Fatman325]

Another good example is the CFO preseason video play #2 of chapter 13 Goal Line/Pylon.

[cmathews]

I would say that the comments accompanying that particular clip are more than a good example...it appears they are the defining interpretation. 

[zebra99]

Very illuminating discussion guys... having been one of those holding the opposite interpretation for years, I have to say that I'm persuaded that the "airborne v. running" distinction is the key under the text of the rules and AR's.  The interpretation also is in keeping with the underlying forward progress assumptions that must have been in place in the old TD AR's involving goal line extension, as well as this year's goal line extension "exceptions" in the TD AR's.

Don't know now whether to flag with that defender who, in an effort to stop forward progress, hits the runner over OB territory whose back foot has just left the ground inbounds and before his front foot hits the ground OB, but I guess that's for another day.

I'll go back to my lurking...

Before I change my practice for years, I'd sure like to see something official from RR!  Wait a minute, I'm in the middle, sure hope I don't make any sideline calls! 

[El Macman]

Another good example is the CFO preseason video play #2 of chapter 13 Goal Line/Pylon.

Well, there you have it.

That means, in question 24, "...falls forward..." means he is airborne, if B is to be the correct answer. OK by me.

[zebra99]

Well, there you have it.

That means, in question 24, "...falls forward..." means he is airborne, if B is to be the correct answer. OK by me.

not a ton of difference between "falls forward" and "strides OB"  - are we saying one could be short of the LTG and the other makes the crucial, BCS championship winning, first down?

[Andrew McCarthy]

Maybe we need a better definition of what "airborne" means since a player running is technically airborne when he makes a stride (stop the bowl video at :42 and you'll see the FIU player not touching the ground as he crosses the sideline).  2-27-6-b is the current definition.  An airborne player is a player not in contact with the ground.

If this is the way they really want it ruled then I would propose a changing the word "airborne" in 4-2-4-d to something like "diving" whose definition would be something like "a player leaves the ground (on his own or from contact with an opponent) such that his next contact with the ground is not with his foot (or feet)".

Or something like that.

[El Macman]

not a ton of difference between "falls forward" and "strides OB"  - are we saying one could be short of the LTG and the other makes the crucial, BCS championship winning, first down?

That, indeed, would be the difference between airborne and not airborne. Why is there a difference between airborne and non-airborne BCs? Couldn't tell ya. Precedes my career.

The best news is that you've had the BCS Championship experience - this wasn't an issue, and y'all did a magnificent job. I haven't (and won't), and am tickled pink to just still be working. We're happy, healthy and livin' in the USA. Its all good.

[El Macman]

This happens to best, so no big deal, but #47 answer should be A, 1/G @ B-6, snap. (Not 1/10)

[Andrew McCarthy]

RR just posted an interpretation of 4-2-4-d.

INTERPRETATION: For purposes of the Exception to 4-2-4-d, a ball carrier who strides across the sideline before first touching out of bounds is considered to be an airborne player.
 
He then gives play examples where we mark the point of progress where the ball is located when the player first steps on the sideline.  So does this interpretation mean that the FIU bowl play was ruled correctly or not?

To me, it doesn't really help clear things up.  Doesn't every player who runs and steps out of bounds stride across the sideline?

[El Macman]

Unbelievable.

That AIN'T what he says in Chapter 13, Play 2 of the National Video. He very cearly - CLEARLY - says progress is to the point where the ball is when he first touches OB.

How the hell does anyone know what to do?

[Diablo]

RR just posted an interpretation of 4-2-4-d.

INTERPRETATION: For purposes of the Exception to 4-2-4-d, a ball carrier who strides across the sideline before first touching out of bounds is considered to be an airborne player.
 
He then gives play examples where we mark the point of progress where the ball is located when the player first steps on the sideline.  So does this interpretation mean that the FIU bowl play was ruled correctly or not?

To me, it doesn't really help clear things up.  Doesn't every player who runs and steps out of bounds stride across the sideline?

Help me out.
Is Dr. Redding saying we mark the dead-ball spot differently when a grounded ball carrier strides over the sideline and first steps OB outside the sideline versus a grounded ball carrier who becomes OB by steping on the sideline?

[Diablo]

Help me out.
Is Dr. Redding saying we mark the dead-ball spot differently when a grounded ball carrier strides over the sideline and first steps OB outside the sideline versus a grounded ball carrier who becomes OB by steping on the sideline?

Yes, Diablo.
Read the thread above entitled "(NCAA) CFO INTERPRETATION: Forward Progress for Ball Carrier Out Of Bounds"

[Diablo]

OK.  I'll pose this question again.

Visualize a grounded ball carrier approaching the sideline.  At the A-30, he begins tightroping inbounds while holding the ball in foul territory.  At the A-34, his left foot lands inbounds, immediately followed by his right foot striding over the sideline and landing OB at the A-36 extended.  The ball in possession of ball carrier is over the extended A-36 when the ball carrier's  right foot lands OB.
Where do you spot the ball for the next down?

[Hursk]

Give him the same forward progress that you would have if he'd been carrying the ball on the "inbounds" side of his body when he goes OB... I think this is the point of the interpretations...give the runner what he earned between the lines, give the defense what they were able to stop between the lines.
And no, it doesn't flow semantically... but I think that's where RR is heading.

[NVFOA_Ump]

But now we have to make a judgment call on "striding" vs "running".  If his front foot touches down while his back foot is still on the ground it's "running" but if his front foot touches down after his back foot has left the ground he's "striding" therefore it's now defined that he's "airborne?  So in addition to keeping track of where the ball is, if his feet are inbounds, we need to determine if both feet were off the ground just before the instant his lead foot touches OB?  Then, we put the ball back where it crossed the sideline?