RefStripes.com

Football Officiating => National Federation Discussion => Topic started by: NCVAReferee on February 19, 2018, 07:31:54 PM

Title: TD or Not?
Post by: NCVAReferee on February 19, 2018, 07:31:54 PM
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?
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: AlUpstateNY on February 19, 2018, 10:06:15 PM
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?

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."
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Ralph Damren on February 20, 2018, 08:28:25 AM
Consider a runner near the sidelines slipping out of an attempted tackle by a defender who is touching the sidelines. Same deal. Remember, though, that a LOOSE BALL touching a player who is touching the sidelines is considered OOB.
Title: Award Team A 6 points
Post by: KWH on March 13, 2018, 04:56:11 PM
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?

 ^good   2-4-1, 2-29-2, 2-34-1, 8-2-1b   ^good
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: NCVAReferee on March 17, 2018, 07:44:57 PM
When is a pass no longer considered a loose ball?
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: bama_stripes on March 18, 2018, 07:42:58 AM
When possession is gained or it becomes dead by rule -- same as any other loose ball.
Title: TD or Not?
Post by: CalhounLJ on March 18, 2018, 08:15:28 AM
So, has the WR established possession of the loose ball in the OP when he stepped on the defender?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: FLAHL on March 18, 2018, 10:08:12 AM
So, has the WR established possession of the loose ball in the OP when he stepped on the defender?


No, but he did when “He then steps in bounds in the end zone”
Title: TD or Not?
Post by: CalhounLJ on March 18, 2018, 03:09:36 PM
No, but he did when “He then steps in bounds in the end zone”
So if he doesn’t have the ball in player possession when he contacted a player who is oob, what rule support do we have for ruling this a catch?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: AlUpstateNY on March 18, 2018, 04:11:24 PM
So if he doesn’t have the ball in player possession when he contacted a player who is oob, what rule support do we have for ruling this a catch?

It doesn't really matter that the player, "have the ball in player possession when he contacted a player who is oob", to be a "catch", and in this instance a TD, what matters is that the player had, and maintained, possession of the ball when he contacted the ground inbounds (or in this case, in the endzone).
Title: TD or Not?
Post by: CalhounLJ on March 18, 2018, 07:41:31 PM
It doesn't really matter that the player, "have the ball in player possession when he contacted a player who is oob", to be a "catch", and in this instance a TD, what matters is that the player had, and maintained, possession of the ball when he contacted the ground inbounds (or in this case, in the endzone).
But the rule you referenced plainly states “a ball in player possession.” Are you saying that’s different from a player’s body touching another player who is oob?
If a player must first touch inbounds to secure player possession, then what is the status of the ball before he Does? if it’s loose, then this can’t be a catch.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: AlUpstateNY on March 18, 2018, 10:05:35 PM
But the rule you referenced plainly states “a ball in player possession.” Are you saying that’s different from a player’s body touching another player who is oob?
If a player must first touch inbounds to secure player possession, then what is the status of the ball before he Does? if it’s loose, then this can’t be a catch.

Neither "a player" (NFHS 2-29-1) or "a ball in player possession" (NFHS 2-29-2) "is oob when any part of the person (or ball) touches anything, other than another player or game official that is on or outside a sideline or end line".

NFHS 2-29-3, however, advises; "a loose ball is oob when it touches anything, including a player or game official that is oob".

When a player who secures possession of a loose ball touches a player or game official who is oob, that touching is inconsequential, and as the referenced play suggests, that player THEN touches the ground (steps inbounds in the EZ) he completes the catch, creating a TD, presuming possession is maintained throughout.
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: js in sc on March 18, 2018, 10:10:14 PM
But the rule you referenced plainly states “a ball in player possession.” Are you saying that’s different from a player’s body touching another player who is oob?
If a player must first touch inbounds to secure player possession, then what is the status of the ball before he Does? if it’s loose, then this can’t be a catch.

Maybe I am confused, but player possession is not the same as returning to the ground.  When the catch is made, that is possession.  In order to complete the catch, he must return to the ground inbounds with it still in his possession.  Possession does not depend on returning to the ground, completion does.  Where am I wrong?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: TD or Not?
Post by: CalhounLJ on March 19, 2018, 06:27:12 AM

The question I’m trying to ask is what determines player possession? Are we gonna use the same criteria we use for other parts of the field? There was an extended discussion about that on this forum not long ago regarding a catch. Can a player possess a ball before he catches it?  If so, I agree this is a td. If he has to complete the catch to possess the ball, then the ball is not in player possession when the player landed on the opponent.  There is a subtle but important difference between this situation and Ralph’s example. In his situation the ball is clearly in player possession because he had feet on the ground first.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: ElvisLives on March 19, 2018, 10:37:50 AM
CalhounLJ,
I actually can't speak for NF rules, but perhaps their rule regarding a player being OB is the same as NCAA.  In NCAA, a player - any player, not just a ball carrier - is NOT out of bounds if he happens to be touching another player that is out of bounds.  So, if said player is also holding a ball after receiving it from a pass (or any loose ball), the ball is not touching anything out of bounds.  That may make the status of the ball still "loose" from the forward pass (because the catch is not yet complete, thus, player possession is not yet established), but the ball is not out of bounds.  It is still alive and in play.  When the receiver (holding the ball) then touches the ground inbounds (and complies with all of the other criteria required to complete a catch), the catch is complete, and player possession is established.  If that happens to be in the end zone, that's a TD.

So, the question is: In NF, does the definition of a player (not just a ball carrier) out bounds have the similar NCAA exception for contacting another player that is out of bounds?

Robert
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: js in sc on March 19, 2018, 11:01:19 AM
CalhounLJ,
I actually can't speak for NF rules, but perhaps their rule regarding a player being OB is the same as NCAA.  In NCAA, a player - any player, not just a ball carrier - is NOT out of bounds if he happens to be touching another player that is out of bounds.  So, if said player is also holding a ball after receiving it from a pass (or any loose ball), the ball is not touching anything out of bounds.  That may make the status of the ball still "loose" from the forward pass (because the catch is not yet complete, thus, player possession is not yet established), but the ball is not out of bounds.  It is still alive and in play.  When the receiver (holding the ball) then touches the ground inbounds (and complies with all of the other criteria required to complete a catch), the catch is complete, and player possession is established.  If that happens to be in the end zone, that's a TD.

So, the question is: In NF, does the definition of a player (not just a ball carrier) out bounds have the similar NCAA exception for contacting another player that is out of bounds?

Robert

Yes.  Rule 2-29-1 exempts a player touching another player or official, who is OOB, from being OOB.  2-29-3 also states that the ball is OOB if IT (the ball itself) touches anything OOB.  Since the player, and not the ball touches the player who is OOB, neither the player, nor the ball would be considered OOB at that time.
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: ElvisLives on March 19, 2018, 11:24:17 AM
Yes.  Rule 2-29-1 exempts a player touching another player or official, who is OOB, from being OOB.  2-29-3 also states that the ball is OOB if IT (the ball itself) touches anything OOB.  Since the player, and not the ball touches the player who is OOB, neither the player, nor the ball would be considered OOB at that time.

OK, so the ball is alive and in play, although still, technically, loose from the forward pass.  The catch is not yet complete.  Wherever he then touches the ground (pylon/goal post, etc.) will determine if the catch becomes complete or incomplete.  If he first touches inbounds - catch and completed pass!  If he first touches out of bounds - no catch, and incomplete pass.

Effectively, it is as though he hasn't touched anything, at that point - he's just "airborne."

Same for NCAA.

Robert
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: AlUpstateNY on March 19, 2018, 01:12:04 PM
The question I’m trying to ask is what determines player possession? Are we gonna use the same criteria we use for other parts of the field? There was an extended discussion about that on this forum not long ago regarding a catch. Can a player possess a ball before he catches it?  If so, I agree this is a td. If he has to complete the catch to possess the ball, then the ball is not in player possession when the player landed on the opponent.  There is a subtle but important difference between this situation and Ralph’s example. In his situation the ball is clearly in player possession because he had feet on the ground first.

If I might suggest, your efforts to conflate "Possession" and "Catch" may be contributing to your confusion.  "Possession" is a required component necessary to ultimately complete a "catch", but is separately defined in NFHS 2-34-1.

A "Catch" is defined in NFHS 2-4-1, as "the act of establishing player possession of a live ball which is in flight, and first contacting the ground inbounds while maintaining possession of the ball......."   Player possession as defined in 2-34-1 is "a ball in player possession is a live ball held or controlled by a player".
Title: TD or Not?
Post by: CalhounLJ on March 19, 2018, 07:46:10 PM
If I might suggest, your efforts to conflate "Possession" and "Catch" may be contributing to your confusion.  "Possession" is a required component necessary to ultimately complete a "catch", but is separately defined in NFHS 2-34-1.

A "Catch" is defined in NFHS 2-4-1, as "the act of establishing player possession of a live ball which is in flight, and first contacting the ground inbounds while maintaining possession of the ball......."   Player possession as defined in 2-34-1 is "a ball in player possession is a live ball held or controlled by a player".
I see. I think you are right. I was thinking that to have possession a catch had to be completed. If simply controlling the ball is establishing player possession, then I agree this is a td. Thanks for all the explanations. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: ElvisLives on March 20, 2018, 07:55:58 AM
I was thinking that to have possession a catch had to be completed. If simply controlling the ball is establishing player possession, then I agree this is a td.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CalhounLJ,
You may want to keep researching.  Again, I don't know NF rules, and maybe they are different in this respect, but, in NCAA, player possession is not achieved until the catch/recovery of a loose ball is completed.  Technically, the ball is still loose from the pass, until player possession is officially achieved (i.e., catch is completed).  As evidence of that - again, in NCAA - should a player grasp and firmly hold a loose ball while the player is airborne, then, while still airborne, he propels the ball in any direction, that is treated as a "bat" of the ball, and not a "pass."  This happened in bowl game, and the airborne intercepting player actually propelled the ball forward to a teammate.  Not truly sure of how to rule, crew assessed a 5-yard illegal forward pass penalty, but gave possession of the ball to the intercepting team.  While both teams were reasonably satisfied with the ruling, the ruling of an illegal forward pass was incorrect.  The following season, John Adams included a new Approved Ruling in the rule book that ruled that such propelling of the ball by an airborne player is simply batting of a loose ball, because player possession has not been achieved (and, officially, a pass can only be made by a player in possession of the ball).  In the case of a pass, the loose ball may be batted in any direction (thus, no foul for propelling it forward).

What other issue would there be if player possession isn't achieved until the catch is complete?

Robert
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: AlUpstateNY on March 20, 2018, 09:58:18 AM

You may want to keep researching.  Again, I don't know NF rules, and maybe they are different in this respect, but, in NCAA, player possession is not achieved until the catch/recovery of a loose ball is completed. 
Robert

One of many reasons, the NFHS Rule Book is so much smaller than it's NCAA counterpart, and NFHS games can be played without the necessity of interruptions to micromanage, and assess microscopic film reviews to insure compliance.
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Ralph Damren on March 20, 2018, 12:09:50 PM
Player catches pass as he lands on the inbounds part of a fellow human who is touching out-of-bounds with another part + player with possession of catch then steps onto the inbounds part of planet earth = strike up the band and let the cheerleaders prance  ^good ^good ^good ^good ^good (5 man crew)....

"That ruling is in accordance with the doctrine of common sense and fair play. " (Source: Referee Mag. April 2018 - pg.18 - last line on baseball quiz)

.....but it does make you sound like you know what you're talking about tR:oLl !!!
Title: TD or Not?
Post by: CalhounLJ on March 20, 2018, 03:51:11 PM
Player catches pass as he lands on the inbounds part of a fellow human who is touching out-of-bounds with another part + player with possession of catch then steps onto the inbounds part of planet earth = strike up the band and let the cheerleaders prance  ^good ^good ^good ^good ^good (5 man crew)....

"That ruling is in accordance with the doctrine of common sense and fair play. " (Source: Referee Mag. April 2018 - pg.18 - last line on baseball quiz)

.....but it does make you sound like you know what you're talking about tR:oLl !!!
Still, Elvis is supporting my argument. If a player has to complete a catch to establish player possession, then technically this play would not fit the parameters of the player possession rule.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: ElvisLives on March 20, 2018, 04:56:24 PM
Still, Elvis is supporting my argument. If a player has to complete a catch to establish player possession, then technically this play would not fit the parameters of the player possession rule.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CalhounJL,
I'm supporting your argument that a player that grasps and firmly holds the pass while airborne does not establish player possession until the catch is completed, which requires him to touch the ground inbounds while holding the ball securely (and complete the catch process).  In the play given, he eventually does that, when he steps on the ground in the end zone (for a TD).  But, while he is stepping on another player, he isn't out of bounds, but he hasn't completed the catch yet, either. While stepping on the other player (friend or foe), he is, effectively, airborne.  If his subsequent first contact with the ground is OB, then the pass is incomplete.  If his subsequent first contact with the ground is inbounds (and he completes the catch process) then the catch is made, and the pass is complete.
While the receiver is "airborne," though, I still can't think of anything that this affects, other than him potentially propelling the ball, which (at least in NCAA) we know how to treat.  Not sure what is hanging you up.

Robert
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: AlUpstateNY on March 20, 2018, 06:48:02 PM
Still, Elvis is supporting my argument. If a player has to complete a catch to establish player possession, then technically this play would not fit the parameters of the player possession rule.

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".
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: js in sc 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
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: ElvisLives 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

Title: TD or Not?
Post by: CalhounLJ 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
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Kalle 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?
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Ralph Damren 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
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: ElvisLives 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
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Ralph Damren 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.
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: prab 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? 
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: ElvisLives 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
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Ralph Damren 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
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Sumstine 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.
Title: TD or Not?
Post by: CalhounLJ 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
Title: TD or Not?
Post by: CalhounLJ 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
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: ElvisLives 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.
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: AlUpstateNY 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.
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Sumstine 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
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: ElvisLives 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
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Sumstine 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.
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: VA Official 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?
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Legacy Zebra 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.
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Sumstine 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.
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Kalle 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.
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: VA Official 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?
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: east louis on May 04, 2018, 08:21:20 AM
 ^TD put 6 on the board
Title: Re: TD or Not?
Post by: Bob M. 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'