Author Topic: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?  (Read 646 times)

Offline Morningrise

  • *
  • Posts: 446
  • FAN REACTION: +17/-5
Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« on: May 10, 2018, 03:31:19 PM »
1/10 @ A-30. QB A11 is under duress at the A-21 when he throws the ball to the A-27 where no eligible receiver is nearby. But A55 catches the pass at the A-27 and runs out of bounds at the A-38. 0:56 remains in the half. Clock?

Offline Legacy Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 512
  • FAN REACTION: +40/-9
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #1 on: May 10, 2018, 03:44:24 PM »
No runoff. The foul did not cause the clock to stop immediately. The ING will be accepted, and it will be 2nd and 19 at the A-21. The clock will stay at :56 and start on the snap.

Offline ilyazhito

  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-2
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #2 on: May 10, 2018, 04:40:21 PM »
Indeed, the ING would not stop the clock. Therefore, no 10-second runoff. Because the illegal touching won't stop play immediately, also no 10-second runoff. 2/19 from the A-21, 56 seconds remaining, clock on the snap (play clock at 25 seconds, because of penalty administration).

Offline Legacy Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 512
  • FAN REACTION: +40/-9
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #3 on: May 10, 2018, 04:57:18 PM »
Because the illegal touching won't stop play immediately, also no 10-second runoff.

This is NOT illegal touching. Not that it matters since the ING would be the accepted penalty anyway, but itís important to note. Illegal touching only applies to legal passes. Since this is not a legal forward pass, it canít be illegal touching by rule.

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 516
  • FAN REACTION: +105/-4
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #4 on: May 10, 2018, 05:06:46 PM »
This is NOT illegal touching. Not that it matters since the ING would be the accepted penalty anyway, but itís important to note. Illegal touching only applies to legal passes. Since this is not a legal forward pass, it canít be illegal touching by rule.
I would consider this as illegal touching of a legal forward pass. I need to check the rule book, but I think the clock would start on the ready for play because it only stopped to administer the penalty.

Offline Legacy Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 512
  • FAN REACTION: +40/-9
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #5 on: May 10, 2018, 05:34:33 PM »
Intentional grounding is just a subset of the list of illegal forward passes in 7-3-2. Also, the clock would not start on the ready because a Team A ball carrier went out of bounds with less than 2 minutes remaining in the half.

Offline ilyazhito

  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-2
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #6 on: May 10, 2018, 07:34:37 PM »
That is true. However, 3-4-4 would supersede the typical timing rule that the clock starts on the snap on out of bounds plays in the last 2 minutes of each half. Because there is no run-off (the ING does not stop the clock, the player going out of bounds does), the normal rule applies, the clock starts on the snap with 56 seconds left.

Is there an approved ruling by either RR or SS on this type of a play (pass with no eligible receiver in the area, caught by an ineligible receiver)? If so, that would clarify whether there can be illegal touching on an illegal pass.

Online ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 491
  • FAN REACTION: +48/-44
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #7 on: May 10, 2018, 07:49:05 PM »
Is there an approved ruling by either RR or SS on this type of a play (pass with no eligible receiver in the area, caught by an ineligible receiver)?

An AR isnít needed.  The rule, 7-3-11, is clear.  Requires the pass to be a legal, for the touching to be a foul.  Touching an illegal pass is not a foul.

Robert

Offline BoBo

  • *
  • Posts: 215
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-1
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #8 on: May 10, 2018, 09:22:21 PM »
I would ask this question.  When does a pass end? When it is caught or grounded?

Lets say the ball is tipped by A55 and the B 44 catches the ball. Are you still going to have a flag ING?


Offline Legacy Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 512
  • FAN REACTION: +40/-9
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #9 on: May 10, 2018, 09:48:20 PM »
A pass ends when it is caught, intercepted, or becomes dead (2-19-1). And yes, you would still have grounding because the passer threw a forward pass into an area with no eligible Team A receiver.

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 516
  • FAN REACTION: +105/-4
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #10 on: May 10, 2018, 10:47:32 PM »
Every discussion at every clinic and meeting I've attended has said to consider this play as illegal touching and not intentional grounding or illegal forward pass if it's caught by the ineligible receiver. If the defense intercepts a similar pass that is untouched by A no foul. If the pass is intentionally tipped by an ineligible lineman you could still have illegal touching.

The logic behind that is the passer is likely not trying to dump the ball to avoid a loss of yardage or conserve time. He was trying to complete probably thinking the guy he was throwing it to was eligible. Illegal touching is a much more logical application of the rules in this case.

Offline ljudge

  • *
  • Posts: 397
  • FAN REACTION: +19/-2
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #11 on: May 14, 2018, 07:35:34 PM »
Every discussion at every clinic and meeting I've attended has said to consider this play as illegal touching and not intentional grounding or illegal forward pass if it's caught by the ineligible receiver. If the defense intercepts a similar pass that is untouched by A no foul. If the pass is intentionally tipped by an ineligible lineman you could still have illegal touching.

The logic behind that is the passer is likely not trying to dump the ball to avoid a loss of yardage or conserve time. He was trying to complete probably thinking the guy he was throwing it to was eligible. Illegal touching is a much more logical application of the rules in this case.

Interesting.  So if it's not ING then I suppose a zap-10 isn't possible if A-55 had dropped the pass.  An illegal incomplete forward pass calls for a zap.  So if he bobbles/drops do we have a zap or not?

Offline ilyazhito

  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-2
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #12 on: May 14, 2018, 09:00:06 PM »
Strictly speaking, there are 3 fouls on the play, ineligible downfield (IDP), illegal touching (ITP), and ING (intentional grounding). This is because A-55 is downfield illegally (he should not be more than 3 yards downfield), he touches (and catches) the pass, and the quarterback throws without an eligible receiver in the area (assuming he remains inside the tackle box). None of these fouls immediately stop the clock, because the "receiver" took the ball out of bounds. The defense would probably choose to enforce the ING, as that penalty carries a loss of down from the spot of the foul, but their hands are tied for the purposes of zap-10. If the pass was incomplete, then we could have zap-10, because the illegal incomplete pass stopped play. However, because the illegal pass was "completed", we cannot have zap-10, because the illegal pass did not stop the clock in the OP. A 2/26 from the A16, 56 seconds remain, clock starts on the snap. 

Offline Legacy Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 512
  • FAN REACTION: +40/-9
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #13 on: May 14, 2018, 09:05:50 PM »
Magician, this was covered in a CFO video a few years ago. The national interpretation is exactly how the rule reads: it is still intentional grounding because there is no eligible receiver in the area. You can't let a lineman bail his QB out of ING just by catching the pass.

ilyashito, as I said above, you can't have both ING and ITP since ITP requires a legal pass. If it's a legal pass, you have ITP, if it's illegal (as in this play), you have ING. The same goes for IDP since IDP also requires a legal pass.

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1214
  • FAN REACTION: +61/-22
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #14 on: May 15, 2018, 08:23:34 AM »
Easy way to think of runoffs is:  "Did the foul/action make me blow my whistle and kill the play?"

So, Illegal Forward pass that is caught and advanced (by whoever):  I blew my whistle to stop the play because of the runner being down, not the foul.  Therefore, no runoff.

Incomplete Illegal Forward Pass: I blew my whistle to stop the play because of the incomplete pass, which was the fouling action.  Therefore, 10 sec runoff.

Online ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 491
  • FAN REACTION: +48/-44
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #15 on: May 15, 2018, 10:07:29 AM »
Magician, this was covered in a CFO video a few years ago. The national interpretation is exactly how the rule reads: it is still intentional grounding because there is no eligible receiver in the area. You can't let a lineman bail his QB out of ING just by catching the pass.

ilyashito, as I said above, you can't have both ING and ITP since ITP requires a legal pass. If it's a legal pass, you have ITP, if it's illegal (as in this play), you have ING. The same goes for IDP since IDP also requires a legal pass.

 :thumbup

For others, the rule doesn't require the pass to be "grounded" in the sense that it actually touches the ground, and it doesn't require that the pass be incomplete.  The expression, "Intentional Grounding" is something of a misnomer.  In fact, it is a forward pass thrown to conserve yardage or time, that is complete, incomplete, or intercepted, if it was thrown to an area where there was no eligible player of Team A.
If your coordinator tells you not to call it an "illegal pass to conserve yardage" when the pass is intercepted, or to call it illegal touching if caught by an ineligible player of A, then, by all means, call it that way.  But, there is no rule support for those calls.

Robert

Offline js in sc

  • *
  • Posts: 39
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-1
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #16 on: May 15, 2018, 10:45:30 AM »
IMO, a forward pass thrown to conserve yardage or time into an area where there is no eligible receiver is referred to as "intentional grounding", but it is still an illegal forward pass as defined in the rules.  This is a foul and the penalty is from the spot of the pass and LOD.  If it is intercepted, the intercepting team has the option to decline the penalty for the illegal forward pass (IG) and keep the ball.  If it is touched or caught by an ineligible player, there should only be one foul, IG.  Illegal touching only occurs with a legal forward pass.

Offline ilyazhito

  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-2
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #17 on: May 15, 2018, 11:44:10 AM »
OK. The OP is scenario is very confusing (why in the world would a lineman be downfield and catching a forward pass? This is not the NFL, where a tackle can declare himself eligible.).

Now I know that ITP and IDP can only happen, by rule, on a legal pass. However, try as I may, I have not found the A.R. that says so, or the section of the rules that explicitly says that ITP and IDP can only happen on a legal pass. I know that rule 7 covers passes, but what part of Rule 7 specifically mentions that ITP and IDP cannot happen on an illegal forward pass?

Online ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 491
  • FAN REACTION: +48/-44
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #18 on: May 15, 2018, 12:36:20 PM »
OK. The OP is scenario is very confusing (why in the world would a lineman be downfield and catching a forward pass? This is not the NFL, where a tackle can declare himself eligible.).

Now I know that ITP and IDP can only happen, by rule, on a legal pass. However, try as I may, I have not found the A.R. that says so, or the section of the rules that explicitly says that ITP and IDP can only happen on a legal pass. I know that rule 7 covers passes, but what part of Rule 7 specifically mentions that ITP and IDP cannot happen on an illegal forward pass?

7-3-10 covers Ineligibles Downfield, and states that they may not be more than three yards down field until a passer throws a LEGAL forward pass.  If the pass is illegal, it doesn't count toward an foul for an ineligible downfield.

7-3-11 covers Illegal Touching, and states that an originally ineligible player may not intentionally touch a LEGAL forward pass until it is touched by an opponent or an official.  If the pass is illegal, it doesn't count toward an illegal touching foul.

As I keep telling folks, every word in the rules means something.  That was especially true when John Adams was writing the rules.  He tried to write as concisely as possible, and he chose words very carefully, to mean precisely what they meant, and no more or less.

Robert

Offline Bwest

  • *
  • Posts: 235
  • FAN REACTION: +12/-3
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #19 on: May 15, 2018, 03:15:56 PM »
Every discussion at every clinic and meeting I've attended has said to consider this play as illegal touching and not intentional grounding or illegal forward pass if it's caught by the ineligible receiver. If the defense intercepts a similar pass that is untouched by A no foul. If the pass is intentionally tipped by an ineligible lineman you could still have illegal touching.

The logic behind that is the passer is likely not trying to dump the ball to avoid a loss of yardage or conserve time. He was trying to complete probably thinking the guy he was throwing it to was eligible. Illegal touching is a much more logical application of the rules in this case.

I believe this interpretation is meant for illegal touching because of an ineligible receiver who went out of bounds. Even though the ball was thrown to an area with no eligible receiver, you would not call ING on this play.

Online ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 491
  • FAN REACTION: +48/-44
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2018, 06:47:33 PM »
OK. The OP is scenario is very confusing (why in the world would a lineman be downfield and catching a forward pass? This is not the NFL, where a tackle can declare himself eligible.).

That wouldnít likely be deliberate.  But, just last season, I had a guard, just a yard or so behind the NZ, turn around just in time to catch an errant pass (passer hit as he was throwing).  I could easily see a situation - particularly a screen pass - in which a blocker, 4 yards beyond the NZ, turns to see what is happening and finds the overthrown ball heading right toward him.  Just natural to try to catch it.

Robert

Offline ilyazhito

  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-2
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2018, 09:08:43 PM »
7-3-10 covers Ineligibles Downfield, and states that they may not be more than three yards down field until a passer throws a LEGAL forward pass.  If the pass is illegal, it doesn't count toward an foul for an ineligible downfield.

7-3-11 covers Illegal Touching, and states that an originally ineligible player may not intentionally touch a LEGAL forward pass until it is touched by an opponent or an official.  If the pass is illegal, it doesn't count toward an illegal touching foul.

As I keep telling folks, every word in the rules means something.  That was especially true when John Adams was writing the rules.  He tried to write as concisely as possible, and he chose words very carefully, to mean precisely what they meant, and no more or less.

Robert

OK. I've re-read 7-3-11, and seen the associated approved ruling "No foul for illegal touching since the pass is illegal". The 7-3-11 approved ruling situation explicitly states that the passer has not been outside the tackle box, so ING is in play. However, does the OP situation explicitly mention the passer in connection to the tackle box? If he was out, in the OP, the pass is not illegal, and the ITP (or IDP) can be enforced, with no zap-10 possible (ITP and IDP do not stop the clock). If he was not out, then the clock starts on the snap, with only the ING in play.

Offline Legacy Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 512
  • FAN REACTION: +40/-9
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #22 on: May 15, 2018, 09:21:13 PM »
In the OP, the passer being out of the tackle box is irrelevant since the line of scrimmage was the A-30 and the pass was caught at the A-27.

Online ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 491
  • FAN REACTION: +48/-44
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #23 on: May 15, 2018, 09:42:12 PM »
...However, does the OP situation explicitly mention the passer in connection to the tackle box? If he was out, in the OP, the pass is not illegal, ...

Just because the passer is outside the tackle box does not mean an illegal pass to conserve yardage (or time) is not possible.  If the passer is under duress, as stated, he still must throw the ball beyond the NZ, and, in the given play, the ball was caught by an originally ineligible player of A behind the NZ.  That makes the pass illegal.  So, no foul for illegal touching, but a foul for an illegal pass to conserve yardage.

Note that a passer that is not under duress is not trying to conserve yardage (or time) if he throws the ball away.  You donít see the expression ďunder duressĒ in the rules, but that is the essence of ďconservingĒ yardage or time.

Robert

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 516
  • FAN REACTION: +105/-4
Re: Intentional grounding but a lineman catches it: Runoff?
« Reply #24 on: May 16, 2018, 09:07:33 PM »
Magician, this was covered in a CFO video a few years ago. The national interpretation is exactly how the rule reads: it is still intentional grounding because there is no eligible receiver in the area. You can't let a lineman bail his QB out of ING just by catching the pass.

ilyashito, as I said above, you can't have both ING and ITP since ITP requires a legal pass. If it's a legal pass, you have ITP, if it's illegal (as in this play), you have ING. The same goes for IDP since IDP also requires a legal pass.
I guess I didn't see that training video. I know Rogers Redding was one of the presenters who shared this philosophy. It's not entirely different than a QB throwing a pass to a player with an eligible number who was covered and thus ineligible. The QB doesn't know he's ineligible and he may not realize he's throwing this pass to A55. Based on that the philosophy that has always been shared with me at every clinic, meeting and study group I've attended consistently shared this. By all means do what your supervisor tells you though. It's going to be a foul either way and the only possible impact will be a possible zap-10. In my 10 years of college officiating I have never had this happen so it's not likely to happen in the first place.