Author Topic: TD or Not?  (Read 13872 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline js in sc

  • *
  • Posts: 194
  • FAN REACTION: +17/-7
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #25 on: March 20, 2018, 06:55:08 PM »
I do not think the confusion about catch, possession, and completion is based on the NF rules.  They seem quite clear. 
In Rule 2-4-1 "a catch is the act of establishing player possession of a live ball which is in flight, and (then) first contacting the ground inbounds while MAINTAINING possession of the ball...". 
In Rule 7-5-5, "It (the pass) is also incomplete when a player in the air POSSESSES the pass and alights so that his first contact with the ground or with anything other than a player or game official is on or outside a boundary."   Possession does not depend on returning to the ground, maintaining possession does.
Thus, IMHO the sequence of events is catch, possession, return to ground inbounds (completion), or out of bounds (incompletion).
I would humbly ask, Where is the confusion in the NF rules?   hEaDbAnG

Online ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 3406
  • FAN REACTION: +161/-143
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #26 on: March 20, 2018, 08:58:24 PM »
Perhaps not, in the NCAA universe, but in the NFHS world 2-34-1 dictates  possession is established is based on a ball being "held or controlled".  However, possessing the ball, alone, doesn't complete a "catch" being made. NFHS 2-4-1 adds the necessary requirement of "first contacting the ground inbounds while maintaining possession of the ball".
That being the case, indeed, that is a distinct difference between NF and NCAA.  But, it doesn’t change the fact that stepping on another player is, effectively, ignored, in both codes.  An airborne player that steps on another player is not out of bounds, and, if the airborne player is touching the ball, the ball is not out of bounds.  Also, the player must touch the ground inbounds before the catch can be complete - both codes seem to agree on that.

So, iin NF, if an airborne player grasps a loose ball and propels it in some direction, is that considered a pass?

Robert


Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
TD or Not?
« Reply #27 on: March 21, 2018, 04:54:03 AM »
TD. NFHS: 2-29-2 "A ball in player possession (see 2-34-1) is out of bounds when the runner or the ball touches anything, other than another player or game official that is on or outside a sideline or end line."
This is what is hanging me up.  This exemption from touching a player or game official who is out of bounds seems to hinge on the status of the ball. It reads like the ball must be in player possession to get the exemption. If a ball is not in player possession until the catch is made, I don’t see how we can use this rule for support. It has been suggested we simply ignore all of this in a spirit of fair play and common sense, and I can see the value of that, but is there rule support, casebook play, or other NFHS guidelines to go by? 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Offline Kalle

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3307
  • FAN REACTION: +109/-35
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #28 on: March 21, 2018, 05:33:56 AM »
CalhounLJ, how about this play:

Pass is thrown close to the sideline. Inbounds A88 jumps and possesses the ball in the air at A-50 over the field of play. B90, who is out of bounds, attempts to tackle A88. A88 first touches ground inbounds at A-50 while still in the grasp of B90. Would you rule this to be an incomplete pass?

Online Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 4655
  • FAN REACTION: +864/-28
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #29 on: March 21, 2018, 07:48:12 AM »
IMHO, pondering 2-4-1, 2-29-2, 2-34-1, and 8-2-1b opens the OP to interpretation ???.

IMHO, in Maine I'm the state interpreter  8].

IMHO, I would ask our guys in Maine to rule  ^TD.

IMHO, the 47 other states and DC may have another interpretation  :-\.

 tR:oLl

Online ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 3406
  • FAN REACTION: +161/-143
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #30 on: March 21, 2018, 07:57:37 AM »
This is what is hanging me up.  This exemption from touching a player or game official who is out of bounds seems to hinge on the status of the ball. It reads like the ball must be in player possession to get the exemption. If a ball is not in player possession until the catch is made, I don’t see how we can use this rule for support. It has been suggested we simply ignore all of this in a spirit of fair play and common sense, and I can see the value of that, but is there rule support, casebook play, or other NFHS guidelines to go by? 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think I see your issue.  Both codes agree that a ball in player possession is not OB if it touches another player (or an official) that is OB.  A loose ball that touches a player or an official that is OB is out of bounds.  In the given scenario, the ball - regardless of whether it is considered to be in player possession or loose - never touches a player that is OB.  The only one touching the ball is the receiver, and he is never OB.  The receiver may have contacted another player OB, but that does not make the receiver OB.  So, regardless of when the receiver first touched the ball, or when he finally secured a firm hold on the ball, the ball itself never touched anything OB.  Ultimately, he completes the catch, and the ball is in the end zone - TD.
 
Yes, had the receiver been battling another player for possession of the ball and, while it was still loose, it touched one of them while that one was OB, the ball is dead at that point - no catch, incomplete pass.

Now, here is where NCAA and NF may diverge.  If the receiver is airborne - which includes when he is stepping on another player before returning to the ground - when he grasps and firmly holds the previously loose ball, in NCAA, officially, the ball is still loose.  If the ball itself was to then touch a player or official that is OB, the ball would be OB, dead, no catch, incomplete pass.  From what I have seen in this thread, for NF, in the same scenario, the ball may be considered in player possession, so it would not be deemed OB.  Still not yet a catch and completed pass, but not OB and dead, either.  Just in "limbo" until the receiver touches the ground.  If his first touch of the ground is inbounds (and he fulfills the catch process), then that's a catch and a completed pass.  If his first touch of the ground is OB, then no catch, incomplete pass.

Does that sound right?

Robert
« Last Edit: March 21, 2018, 07:59:11 AM by ElvisLives »

Online Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 4655
  • FAN REACTION: +864/-28
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #31 on: March 21, 2018, 08:10:52 AM »
To me, landing on a player inbounds - who is touching OOB - is like landing on the field below the player. However, if the ball is loose - consider the receiver dropping pass which lands on back of player who's touching OOB and then regaining possession of pass - the pass would be considered incomplete per 2-29-3 & 2-31-4.

Hope that makes sense.

Offline prab

  • *
  • Posts: 669
  • FAN REACTION: +37/-47
  • Wherever you go, there you are!
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #32 on: March 21, 2018, 08:50:05 AM »
A QB throws a pass to A WR in the back of the end zone.  A WR jumps high to catch the pass and when he comes down he steps on the defensive player who is laying prone across the end line.  He then steps in bounds in the end zone.  Touchdown or incomplete?

Has anyone actually seen this happen in an NFHS game?  If so, what was the ruling on the field? 

Online ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 3406
  • FAN REACTION: +161/-143
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #33 on: March 21, 2018, 09:24:07 AM »
To me, landing on a player inbounds - who is touching OOB - is like landing on the field below the player.


Ralph,
In NCAA, if a ball carrier falls on another player, touching the other player with something other than hand or foot, the ball carrier is not down.  The ball remains alive, and, if the BC regains his feet/balance, he may continue to advance.  So, that would not be like touching the ground below the other player.  Similarly, if a BC touches a player OB - say the other player is completely OB, and the BC steps on the other player's buttocks or shoulder, the BC is NOT out of bounds, and may continue to advance.  Unlike the goal line, the sideline is a line, not a plane.  For a player to be OB, he must actually be touching the ground or something that is OB (other than another player of official), such as a goal post or pylon (or, heaven forbid, the chains, chain crew, coach, squad member, etc.).  Simply being in the air over "foul ground" (over or outside the sideline) is nothing.  When stepping on another player, that foot or feet is/are, effectively, airborne.

Robert

Online Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 4655
  • FAN REACTION: +864/-28
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #34 on: March 21, 2018, 09:37:10 AM »
Ralph,
In NCAA, if a ball carrier falls on another player, touching the other player with something other than hand or foot, the ball carrier is not down.  The ball remains alive, and, if the BC regains his feet/balance, he may continue to advance.  So, that would not be like touching the ground below the other player.  Similarly, if a BC touches a player OB - say the other player is completely OB, and the BC steps on the other player's buttocks or shoulder, the BC is NOT out of bounds, and may continue to advance.  Unlike the goal line, the sideline is a line, not a plane.  For a player to be OB, he must actually be touching the ground or something that is OB (other than another player of official), such as a goal post or pylon (or, heaven forbid, the chains, chain crew, coach, squad member, etc.).  Simply being in the air over "foul ground" (over or outside the sideline) is nothing.  When stepping on another player, that foot or feet is/are, effectively, airborne.

Robert

Valid point, Robert, my intent was in reference to the OP as to the pass being complete, not the runner being down via contact with the ground. My bad on not being clearer. While an argument could be made that the pass hadn't yet been completed in the OP when the receiver landed on the defender, the loose ball never touched the player that was touching OOB. The catch was then completed when the receiver, with the ball in his possession, stepped off the player inbounds.

IMHO, it would be much easier to explain ^TD

than  ^no

Offline Sumstine

  • *
  • Posts: 387
  • FAN REACTION: +70/-10
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #35 on: March 21, 2018, 01:02:41 PM »
NFHS spirit of the rule is that unless the loose ball is touched by an OOB player and airborne control of a pass is not interrupted in this situation. I understand the definitions but this exact situation is not specifically addressed like many very unusual situations. The process of a catch had also opened the door to some interesting situations but best to stick with intent and that is if a non-controlled loose ball is touched by a player OOB it is dead by rule.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
TD or Not?
« Reply #36 on: March 24, 2018, 06:30:26 AM »
I think I see your issue.  Both codes agree that a ball in player possession is not OB if it touches another player (or an official) that is OB.  A loose ball that touches a player or an official that is OB is out of bounds.  In the given scenario, the ball - regardless of whether it is considered to be in player possession or loose - never touches a player that is OB.  The only one touching the ball is the receiver, and he is never OB.  The receiver may have contacted another player OB, but that does not make the receiver OB.  So, regardless of when the receiver first touched the ball, or when he finally secured a firm hold on the ball, the ball itself never touched anything OB.  Ultimately, he completes the catch, and the ball is in the end zone - TD.
 
Yes, had the receiver been battling another player for possession of the ball and, while it was still loose, it touched one of them while that one was OB, the ball is dead at that point - no catch, incomplete pass.

Now, here is where NCAA and NF may diverge.  If the receiver is airborne - which includes when he is stepping on another player before returning to the ground - when he grasps and firmly holds the previously loose ball, in NCAA, officially, the ball is still loose.  If the ball itself was to then touch a player or official that is OB, the ball would be OB, dead, no catch, incomplete pass.  From what I have seen in this thread, for NF, in the same scenario, the ball may be considered in player possession, so it would not be deemed OB.  Still not yet a catch and completed pass, but not OB and dead, either.  Just in "limbo" until the receiver touches the ground.  If his first touch of the ground is inbounds (and he fulfills the catch process), then that's a catch and a completed pass.  If his first touch of the ground is OB, then no catch, incomplete pass.

Does that sound right?

Robert
Yes. This is exactly my issue.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
TD or Not?
« Reply #37 on: March 24, 2018, 06:33:36 AM »
CalhounLJ, how about this play:

Pass is thrown close to the sideline. Inbounds A88 jumps and possesses the ball in the air at A-50 over the field of play. B90, who is out of bounds, attempts to tackle A88. A88 first touches ground inbounds at A-50 while still in the grasp of B90. Would you rule this to be an incomplete pass?
No, because A landed inbounds. Let me ask it a different way- what if B90 is lying on the ground completely OOB, and A lands on him with both feet, then steps off his back onto the playing field inbounds. Would you rule that a catch?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Online ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 3406
  • FAN REACTION: +161/-143
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #38 on: March 24, 2018, 10:22:45 AM »
No, because A landed inbounds. Let me ask it a different way- what if B90 is lying on the ground completely OOB, and A lands on him with both feet, then steps off his back onto the playing field inbounds. Would you rule that a catch?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

In NCAA, that would be a catch, and a completed pass, ball still alive and in play.  From what I have read in this thread so far, it sounds like that would also be the case for NF, but I am no authority for NF.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4727
  • FAN REACTION: +341/-919
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #39 on: March 24, 2018, 12:57:08 PM »
No, because A landed inbounds. Let me ask it a different way- what if B90 is lying on the ground completely OOB, and A lands on him with both feet, then steps off his back onto the playing field inbounds. Would you rule that a catch?

You might consider, NFHS 2-29-1 indicates that "A player is OOB when any part of the person is touching anything OTHER THAN ANOTHER PLAYER OR GAME OFFICIAL that is on or outside the sideline or end line".  It does not address, or suggest "the player" is "inbounds", only that the contact does NOT render him OOB.

The ultimate status will be be decided when (and until) "the player" actually touches the GROUND, and whether that touch is Inbounds or OOB, will determine the result of the play.

Offline Sumstine

  • *
  • Posts: 387
  • FAN REACTION: +70/-10
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #40 on: April 30, 2018, 12:43:38 PM »
NFHS spirit of the rule is that unless the loose ball is touched by an OOB player. Airborne control of a pass is not interrupted in this situation. I understand the definitions but this exact situation is not specifically addressed like many very unusual situations. The process of a catch had also opened the door to some interesting situations but best to stick with intent and that is if a non-controlled loose ball is touched by a player OOB it is dead by rule.

NCAA Editorial Change for 2018

Loose Ball OOB
4-2-3(a)
 
A ball not in player CONTROL … is OOB when it touches ….
            - used to say “possession”
            - want to avoid the situation where a defender OOB touches the ball that is controlled (but not yet possessed) in the hands of a receiver who has not yet completed the process of the catch

Online ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 3406
  • FAN REACTION: +161/-143
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #41 on: April 30, 2018, 06:54:29 PM »
NCAA Editorial Change for 2018

Loose Ball OOB
4-2-3(a)
 
A ball not in player CONTROL … is OOB when it touches ….
            - used to say “possession”
            - want to avoid the situation where a defender OOB touches the ball that is controlled (but not yet possessed) in the hands of a receiver who has not yet completed the process of the catch

Matt, does this affect a receiver that hasn’t yet completed the catch process, and, for example, is sliding out of bounds (the process started inbounds) but he is able to keep the ball tucked against his body, the ball ever so slightly moving, before he is able to get a firm hold on the ball?

Robert

Offline Sumstine

  • *
  • Posts: 387
  • FAN REACTION: +70/-10
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #42 on: April 30, 2018, 11:16:10 PM »
Matt, does this affect a receiver that hasn’t yet completed the catch process, and, for example, is sliding out of bounds (the process started inbounds) but he is able to keep the ball tucked against his body, the ball ever so slightly moving, before he is able to get a firm hold on the ball?

Robert

You are asking multiple questions. This clarification was to the intent of the original rule that if a player who is OOB touches a loose ball the ball is dead by rule. (Alabama sideline catch in the national championship game) It the game an airborne receiver controlled the ball but had not yet completed the process of a catch when an OOB player attempting to break up the pass and take down the receiver touches the ball while it is in control but not player possession of the receiver due to the process of the catch rule.

Once a receiver has firm control and in your case is on the ground sliding OOB the catch process is over and the ball is dead due to the body part being down in the field. If he has not completed the catch process and the ball is loose as he is sliding OOB it is an incomplete pass. The real question is when it looks like he had control and there is some ball movement but not sure if it is controlled or not as he slides OOB then we stand with the call on the field of catch or incomplete.

Offline VA Official

  • *
  • Posts: 197
  • FAN REACTION: +4/-6
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #43 on: May 02, 2018, 07:46:56 PM »
NFHS spirit of the rule is that unless the loose ball is touched by an OOB player and airborne control of a pass is not interrupted in this situation. I understand the definitions but this exact situation is not specifically addressed like many very unusual situations. The process of a catch had also opened the door to some interesting situations but best to stick with intent and that is if a non-controlled loose ball is touched by a player OOB it is dead by rule.

Trying to discern this post Matt (or anyone who can answer), sorry for my confusion. Is this saying the spirit of the rule is that a controlled ball by an airborne player is not considered OOB if also touched by an OOB player?
« Last Edit: May 02, 2018, 07:51:17 PM by VA Official »

Offline Legacy Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 953
  • FAN REACTION: +52/-9
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #44 on: May 02, 2018, 09:29:45 PM »
It's in response to this play.

https://twitter.com/SECNetwork/status/950553824909058048

28 White's hand touches the ball while his foot is out of bounds before 6 Red touches the ground to technically complete the catch. By rule this should have been an incomplete pass since the ball was still loose by definition. This editorial change would make this a catch since 6 had control of the ball even though he didn't have possession.

Offline Sumstine

  • *
  • Posts: 387
  • FAN REACTION: +70/-10
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #45 on: May 02, 2018, 11:52:30 PM »
Trying to discern this post Matt (or anyone who can answer), sorry for my confusion. Is this saying the spirit of the rule is that a controlled ball by an airborne player is not considered OOB if also touched by an OOB player?

The spirit of the rule never considered controlled but not possessed because it is such a rare situation. Spirit of the rule was to cover a ball in the air or rolling on the ground. Mechanically impossible in most cases to get see the order in live play due to control without possession usually happens in the process of a catch and that is high action while the foot or ground contact is low action. The spirit of the rule is to cover fumbles or kicks near the sideline that are recoverable. It was never intended for this situation and it should not be.

Hats off to the NCAA for making the clarification after seeing the play in a high profile game.

Offline Kalle

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3307
  • FAN REACTION: +109/-35
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #46 on: May 03, 2018, 02:48:27 AM »
(Sorry to hijack NF discussion) I think this also became more of an issue with the recent inbounds/out of bounds status change, so an airborne player might now be out of bounds.

Offline VA Official

  • *
  • Posts: 197
  • FAN REACTION: +4/-6
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #47 on: May 03, 2018, 11:20:20 AM »
The spirit of the rule never considered controlled but not possessed because it is such a rare situation. Spirit of the rule was to cover a ball in the air or rolling on the ground. Mechanically impossible in most cases to get see the order in live play due to control without possession usually happens in the process of a catch and that is high action while the foot or ground contact is low action. The spirit of the rule is to cover fumbles or kicks near the sideline that are recoverable. It was never intended for this situation and it should not be.

Hats off to the NCAA for making the clarification after seeing the play in a high profile game.

Thanks for the clarification. I do like the NCAA's change on this as well.

So, for NFHS, since the controlled ball scenario is not covered under the spirit of this rule, the ball should not be considered OOB, correct?

Offline east louis

  • *
  • Posts: 142
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-15
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #48 on: May 04, 2018, 08:21:20 AM »
 ^TD put 6 on the board

Offline Bob M.

  • *
  • Posts: 1055
  • FAN REACTION: +98/-20
Re: TD or Not?
« Reply #49 on: May 15, 2018, 10:00:04 PM »
REPLY: Fed rules still suffer from the circularity of possession and catch. You can't possess a ball until you've caught it, but a catch requires that you possess it and then touch inbounds. I know that Steve Hall has tried to get this fixed a few times and has given up. They need to get the requirement for 'possession' out of the definition of catch and replace it with 'control'
Bob M.