Nitpicking about FG uprights

[#92]

When double checking the rules, I found Rule 8-4-1-a reading:

A field goal shall be scored if a scrimmage kick, which may be a drop kick or place kick, passes over the crossbar between the uprights of the receiving team’s goal before it touches a player of the kicking team or the ground.

Since the ball went through the imaginary cylinder, extending the uprights, it didn't pass between the uprights (extended). So no issue here.

But I was wondering... Common sense tells us a Field Goal is also scored if the ball passes between the uprights extended (above the crossbar obviously). But it doesn't look like that's mentioned somewhere explicitly. Or is my understanding of the English word "between" incorrect, and does it mean the uprights extended are included by defenition of the word "between"?

Nitpicking of course, but as Kalle said somewhere: "I think we all agree that with rules sloppy language easily leads to sloppy thinking [...], so nitpicking is good."

[Kalle]

Well, the rules do say that the crossbar and the uprights are treated as a line, which means that the line does extend indefinitely upwards on both sides.

To give credit where credit is due: I think the sloppy thinking saying was first said by The King.

[ElvisLives]

Can't take credit for any such quote.  But, I did day that nitpicking is a good thing. 

Some lines on a football field do not have a vertical component, i.e., extending the ball or part of a body over the space above the ground outside of a sideline means nothing.  However, by rule, and with the respect to the ball only, the goal line is treated as a plane, i.e., when the ball touches or penetrates (in whole or in part) that plane, that means something (could be a TD, could be a safety, could be touching/batting of the ball in the end zone).
For the purposes of a field goal, the goal is treated as a "line," thus, requiring the ball to touch something (not merely penetrate a plane, as in the case of a TD) to determine if a goal is scored.  In theory (never seen it happen, even in windy west Texas), a FG attempt could pass over the crossbar and between the uprights, but get blown back thorough the uprights and over the crossbar, and it will NOT score.
As to the question about the ultimate height of the uprights (or the inside edge, at least), #92 is right in that the rules don't directly address this condition.  However, the fact that the physical criteria for the goal, by rule, requires the uprights to be AT LEAST 30' above the ground implies that, if taller uprights, with no limit on their height, are allowable, then the inside edges of the uprights must extend vertically to infinity.

Robert

[OSU65]

So....shouldn't the official be looking up along the inside edge of each cylinder and call it a miss if any part of the ball touches that extended vertical line ? If that is the case then the "practical" width of the goal is wider up to 30 feet because the ball can hit the physical post and bounce through for a score. Above 30' it would not pass inside the "virtual" line ( the entire ball ) of the extended goal post and would be a miss. .... Correct?

I never see things like this as nitpicking. If I can't answer any rules question then I don't know that rule.

[ElvisLives]

OSU65,
That is certainly one way to look at it.  Officially, the ball has to pass between the uprights.  If the ball bounces off an upright, then passes between the uprights, then it has met the requirements for a score.  Yeah, a kick above the top of the uprights is at a disadvantage, since it won't have the opportunity to deflect off an upright.  As an F, I observed many FG attempts, but never saw one pass above an upright.  However, as an R, I know we had at least two FG attempts pass higher than, and very near the uprights.  Both ruled correctly 'out'.  Yes, a tough call to have to make.
Robert