More language heartburn (for me, anyway)

[ElvisLives]

7-3-2-e
It is thrown from in or beyond the neutral zone after a ball carrier's entire body and the ball have been beyond the neutral zone.
-------------------------------------------------------------

A lot of unnecessary words in that statement. "from in or behind the neutral zone" is superfluous. The rest of the sentence is all that is needed, because, once the ball is in possession (by anybody) beyond the NZ, then a forward pass may not be made, by anybody, anywhere, anytime, thereafter.
And, "ball carrier's" should be replaced with "passer." By definition, the person who makes a forward pass is the passer, regardless if the pass is legal or illegal.

"It is thrown after a passer's entire body and the ball have been beyond the neutral zone."
But, even that leaves a gap in the rule. By strict reading, the passer may have been beyond the neutral zone, and the ball may have been beyond the neutral zone, but the passer may not have been in possession of the ball beyond the neutral zone. "How?", you ask? The ball is loose from a fumble, and the Team A player who eventually throws the pass is beyond the neutral zone, then the ball gets muffed back behind the neutral zone, where that same Team A player moves back being the neutral and recovers the ball, then throws this forward pass in question. Technically, the ball was not in possession beyond the NZ, so this pass would be legal. And that may be what is intended. But the rule could be better written to be 100% clear:

"It is thrown after the ball has been in player possession beyond the neutral zone."

I they don't want a forward pass to be legal if the loose ball has been beyond the neutral zone, period (in player possession or loose), then travels back behind the neutral zone, then the rule should read:
   
"It is thrown after the ball has been beyond the neutral zone (loose or in player possession)."


 

[Kalle]

And, "ball carrier's" should be replaced with "passer." By definition, the person who makes a forward pass is the passer, regardless if the pass is legal or illegal.

If the rule would be changed to say "passer" instead of "ball carrier", wouldn't that then make this a legal play?

1/10@A-20. QB A12 receives a snap from A55 and hands the ball off to RB A33 at A-17. A33 runs to A-21 and throws a backward pass back to A12. A12 receives the pass at A-18 and immediately throws a forward pass to A88, who catches the ball at A-40 and is immediately downed there.

In the above play situation the passer has never been beyond the NZ so "the passer's entire body has been beyond the neutral zone" would be false, and due to the "and" (instead of an "or") it would make the entire clause e) not apply?

[ElvisLives]

If the rule would be changed to say "passer" instead of "ball carrier", wouldn't that then make this a legal play?

1/10@A-20. QB A12 receives a snap from A55 and hands the ball off to RB A33 at A-17. A33 runs to A-21 and throws a backward pass back to A12. A12 receives the pass at A-18 and immediately throws a forward pass to A88, who catches the ball at A-40 and is immediately downed there.

In the above play situation the passer has never been beyond the NZ so "the passer's entire body has been beyond the neutral zone" would be false, and due to the "and" (instead of an "or") it would make the entire clause e) not apply?

Kalle, what you say is true, which is why I made the final suggested language above, which, in retrospect, I reduced the sentence even more:

"It is thrown after the ball has crossed the neutral zone (loose or in player possession)."

This covers all possibilities, UNLESS the rules committee wants to allow a loose ball to travel beyond the NZ, and then rebound, or be muffed, back in/behind the NZ and still be allowed to be passed forward. But, I am fairly certain they do not want to allow a forward pass after the ball has been beyond the NZ, either in possession or loose.

I may fire your scenario to Shaw and see what he says.

[ump_ben]

"It is thrown after the ball has been beyond the neutral zone (loose or in player possession)."

This doesn't quite work because if the ball is IN player possession it can be fully past the neutral zone as long as some part of the passer is behind the neutral zone. 
For that matter it can be the ball carrier who possesses it past the line I think:
A12 hands the ball to A1 who runs forward tripping over the line of scrimmage.  His toes never pass the neutral zone.  He laterals the ball back to A12 just before he is down.  A12  throws a forward pass.  This is illegal because the ball was loose beyond the neutral zone (based on the Shaw interpretation in the other thread)
A12 hands the ball to A1 who runs forward and is hit at the line of scrimmage.  His toes never pass the neutral zone but the rest of his body and all of the ball do.  As he is being driven back and before his forward progress is ruled stopped he manages to lateral the ball to A12 who throws a legal forward pass?

[ElvisLives]

"It is thrown after the ball has been beyond the neutral zone (loose or in player possession)."

This doesn't quite work because if the ball is IN player possession it can be fully past the neutral zone as long as some part of the passer is behind the neutral zone. 
For that matter it can be the ball carrier who possesses it past the line I think:
A12 hands the ball to A1 who runs forward tripping over the line of scrimmage.  His toes never pass the neutral zone.  He laterals the ball back to A12 just before he is down.  A12  throws a forward pass.  This is illegal because the ball was loose beyond the neutral zone (based on the Shaw interpretation in the other thread)
A12 hands the ball to A1 who runs forward and is hit at the line of scrimmage.  His toes never pass the neutral zone but the rest of his body and all of the ball do.  As he is being driven back and before his forward progress is ruled stopped he manages to lateral the ball to A12 who throws a legal forward pass?

Yeah, so let’s try:
   
"It is thrown after the ball, in its entirety, has been beyond the neutral zone while loose, or after the ball and the ball carrier, both in their entirety, have has been beyond the neutral zone.”

That ought to do it.

[ump_ben]

I like that; nitpick in your text though.

"It is thrown after the ball, in its entirety, has been beyond the neutral zone while loose, or after the ball and the ball carrier, both in their entirety, have has been beyond the neutral zone.”

[ElvisLives]

I like that; nitpick in your text though.

"It is thrown after the ball, in its entirety, has been beyond the neutral zone while loose, or after the ball and the ball carrier, both in their entirety, have has been beyond the neutral zone.”

Thought I’d corrected that, but I forgot to delete ‘has.’
Thanks. But, we’re just fantasizing anyway.