2014 Editorial Changes

[Magician]

So if a receiver jumps from in bounds, controls a pass, then lands out of bounds, this is a completed catch now?

No. He still needs to get one foot in to compete the catch. All he's done by rule is touched it while in bounds. Great question and one I'm sure Rogers considered when coming up with the rule.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk

[Kalle]

I think this is an asinine rule change (pardon, "editorial change").

This actually reverses the direction of the rules changes regarding in bounds / out of bounds. Until about five years ago, an airborne player was always in bounds. Then, RR introduced the rule that for free kicks what matters is where you end up. Now this is reversed and it will now matter where you came from.

Even though I prefer the rules before the infamous AR 6-2-2-IV, I think the new change is better than the situation with that AR.

[Rulesman]

This is one rule basketball has right: the status of an airborne player is where he last touched the ground. Pretty simple, isn't it?

[Diablo]

So by this logic... if a receiver jumps from in bounds, controls a pass, then lands out of bounds, this is a completed catch now?

I don't think so.  To catch a forward pass, the rules mandate that the receiver controlling the ball must touch the ground inbounds (2-4-3-a-2).

[younggun]

OOB player and inbounds player leave a lot of questions of the table. Can't wait for the ARs.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Kalle]

What kinds of questions do you have in mind? The new rule seems pretty clear-cut to me.

[younggun]

What kinds of questions do you have in mind? The new rule seems pretty clear-cut to me.

So if on a kick off K jumps from inbounds and catches the kick and then lands out of bounds will he have to be ruled as catching the kick? What about R?

[ref6983]

So if on a kick off K jumps from inbounds and catches the kick and then lands out of bounds will he have to be ruled as catching the kick? What about R?

As a start, can we rephrase your question using more accurate terminology?

So if on a kick off Team A jumps from inbounds and controls the kick and then lands out of bounds will he have to be ruled as catching or recovering the kick? What about Team B?

Answer: In either case, the player and the ball are both inbounds when he touches it. However, there is no possession because the player (either A or B) did not complete the catch or recovery because his next contact with the ground was out of bounds. In the case of a Team A player, this would be a kickoff OOB. In the case of a Team B player, the ball belongs to Team B at the point that it crossed the sideline.

[dvasques]

Not really
Magician posted a while ago that RR said during a clinic that


"Receiving team player jumps from in bounds, controls the ball, and lands out of bounds.  Previously free kick out of bounds.  Now B's ball at the spot the ball crossed the sideline.  He felt this was consistent with the player standing near the sideline and touching the ball before it goes out of bounds.

RR felt this was a logical definition for out of bounds and in bounds.  We all know Alf has argued this should be the interpretation of the previous rule, but that's not the case.  Even though this is an editorial change, it is a change in the rule and not just a change in philosophy."

[TxJim]

A12 throws a long pass near the sideline toward A88. B22 defender leaps from out of bounds and touches pass while he is airborne. The ball is then caught by A88 inbounds and runs for an apparant touchdown.  Editorial change makes this pass incomplete by rule. Correct? 

[Kalle]

A12 throws a long pass near the sideline toward A88. B22 defender leaps from out of bounds and touches pass while he is airborne. The ball is then caught by A88 inbounds and runs for an apparant touchdown.  Editorial change makes this pass incomplete by rule. Correct?

Yes. B22 is out of bounds when he touches the ball not in player possession.