Passing posture foul on illegal forward pass

[TxJim]

On 2nd and 10 at the A-40, QB A10 is flushed out of the pocket and runs around the right end.  He then throws a forward pass at the A-42 and is immediately hit by B19 forcibly at or below the knees while A10 is still in a passing posture. 

We had flags down for both an illegal forward pass and the new 9-1-9b foul reasoning this was a "safety issue" and offset. There was some discussion on our crew regarding whether this protection extends to an illegal pass by a runner completely beyond the LOS, but the safety concern did prevail.  Opinions?

[TXMike]

Since "normal" RTP protection extends to the passer of an illegal fwd pass it only stands to reason that this new variety does also

[goodgrr]

Why would the protection extend when the protection for a kicker doesn't?

"VII. Punter A22 is 15 yards behind the neutral zone when he catches the long snap, sprints to
his right at an angle toward the line of scrimmage, and runs outside the tackle box. He
then stops and punts the ball, and is immediately hit by a diving B89. RULING: Legal
play, no foul by B89. A22 loses his roughing or running-into protection by carrying the
ball outside the tackle box."

The above is because the kicker looks like a runner.  The QB past the LOS is a runner too surely?

[TXMike]

The rules specifically remove the kicker's protection.  The rulemakers also specifically removed the requiremen for a player to throw a LEGAL forward passer to be determined a passer.   Does a passer lose his protection by carrying the ball outside the tackle box?  No.

[goodgrr]

I understand the rules as stated, I'm querying why one should retain protection and the other loses it.

I know the QB doesn't lose it outside the tackle box, but then he can still pass from there.  Once he's past the LOS he can't, so logically why retain the restriction

Is this just protection of the expensive asset?

[CenTexZebra]

Was the QB on the run when he threw the pass? Or did he stop his scramble and set up and throw?

[TxJim]

Was the QB on the run when he threw the pass? Or did he stop his scramble and set up and throw?

He was moving forward, did not stop to throw.  Does that matter on how you'd rule?

[Hondo]

He was moving forward, did not stop to throw.  Does that matter on how you'd rule?

He has to be in a passing posture.  The OP states he was, so this would be a foul. But if a passer throws the ball "on the run", this has the chance of not being a foul. Judgment call solely by the R as to if the passer was in a "passing posture".

[CenTexZebra]

The way it was explained to us at our reg clinic in Waco, for this to be called the QB needed to be set up to throw. If he was on the move while throwing it would not be called.

[TxJim]

The way it was explained to us at our reg clinic in Waco, for this to be called the QB needed to be set up to throw. If he was on the move while throwing it would not be called.

I have never heard that and I don't see how anyone arrives at that given the rule as written.   

[Legacy Zebra]

I have never heard that and I don't see how anyone arrives at that given the rule as written.

Straight from 9-1-9-b:

It is not a foul if the offensive player is a runner not in a passing posture

[TxJim]

So, what you essentially saying is a "runner" can never assume a passing posture while moving.  He must stop or be stationary to meet your definition of passing posture.

[TXMike]

I think the CFO Bulletin (attached)  on it makes it pretty clear.  The running QB is not going to get the protection

[attachment deleted by admin]

[TexDoc]

I think the CFO Bulletin (attached)  on it makes it pretty clear.  The running QB is not going to get the protection

Nor should he. 

[Rulesman]

We can call it the Manziel rule. 

[TxJim]

I think the CFO Bulletin (attached)  on it makes it pretty clear.  The running QB is not going to get the protection

Well, that would have been useful information to have.