ND-Michigan play in endzone

[chymechowder]

On the play where the Michigan QB threw an INT for a TD in his endzone, should the R have had a flag on the ground for intentional grounding?  It looked like the QB was just trying to dump the ball before he was sacked in the endzone. I don't believe there were any eligible receivers in the area. I could be wrong about that, but assuming there weren't:

The R saw the ND lineman catch the ball and immediately signaled TD. Just before the try, Mich called timeout and the play was challenged/reviewed. Had the replay official ruled incomplete, could the R at that point have (retroactively) ruled safety?  Could the replay official rule safety?  My guess is no on both points, which makes me wonder, mechanic-wise, about throwing the IG flag even as you're signaling TD.

[Magician]

Great question.  I remember several years ago someone asking something similar on a pass caught by a lineman on a play where the QB was obviously trying to dump the ball while under pressure.  I think it was Dave Parry who said it probably should be IG as well as illegal touching.  I don't remember for sure.  There is nothing in the rule book that says the pass has to be incomplete.

Let's say a QB is in his own end zone getting pressured and he throws the ball to A70 who catches it at the A3.  There are no eligible receivers anywhere in the area.  Illegal touching and intentional grounding would have very different results.  It seems like the general consensus was NOT to use IG if the ball is caught.

[Hawkeye]

First on the ND-Mich Play - By the letter of the law, since there is no team A eligible receiver in the area, we could throw IG, however, as was pointed out, it the pass is caught (by B), we do not throw IG.

If a Team A lineman catches the pass and there is no team A eligible in the area, then it is ONLY IG, not illegal touching, since illegal touching requires a legal forward pass.

7-3-2-h, 7-3-11

[chymechowder]

Gotcha, thanks. But that still leaves the question about the play being challenged. If it had been ruled incomplete by replay, could Grounding/Safety then have been ruled? Either by replay or the R?

Because if not, then it seems like it would be a weird unfair disadvantage to Team B: "If your D lineman had dropped the pass, you'd get 2 points and the ball. But I initially thought he'd caught it. Turns out, I was incorrect. So not only do you not get 6 points, you don't even get 2 points. And Team A gets a huuuuge bailout."

[Hawkeye]

I don't believe replay could add IG if they rule incomplete, I think they can only rule Illegal fwd passes over the line in replay (I'm no expert on replay, though) - 12-3-2-c.

It would be very unusual for the R to throw a flag for IG after getting the ruling of incomplete through replay, but I guess he could, since there hasn't been another play run. 5-2-9.

[Joe Stack]

Team B touching the ball makes everyone eligible, and once Team B touches it, there can't really be any fouls associated with what happens -- not to mention that since everyone is now eligible, if there is ANY Team A player within 2 zip codes, there's no foul. Sort of like a Team B player blocking a pass that ends up going several yards behind the passer and landing there. A Team A player is clearly not in that area but no one would ever think of calling that grounding. Its just incomplete.

So, interesting point, but since whether complete or incomplete, Team B's touching negates a foul so replay is irrelevant.

[NVFOA_Ump]

Team B touching the ball makes everyone eligible, and once Team B touches it, there can't really be any fouls associated with what happens ........

So am I reading this correctly?  You're saying that if the A QB, about to be tackled in the EZ for a safety, throws a forward pass intentionally into the feet of the defensive lineman who's about to tackle him for the safety that you would not have a flag for IG because the pass has been touched by team B?

[dvasques]

This play is in the game review for this week

RR says illegal forward pass should be flagged because there was no A eligible receiver around the ball, even if it was intercepted by B

[bossman72]

This was also on Rom Gilbert's site for this week - different game, but similar play.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9Qz51kR8Ao