0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I realize that has no bearing on the rule, but common sense says not to be “too pure” here. Tack the penalty on if the ruling on the field is a catch.
NVFOA would you have the same answer if the foul was UNR defenseless player?(ball still caught)
"WORD FROM THE TOP : He's a defenseless player until he's a runner. Once he's a runner you have a runninmg play . The new rule was intended for the defenseless player = loose ball play = previous spot.TWO IMPORTANT THINGS TO REMEMBER......If contact accurrs prior to ball arrival = DPI/OPIDon't always assume they want the completed catch if greater than 15, as the accepted penalty allows replay of the down."This was Ralph Damren's response on a similar thread in 2023 regarding defenseless player foul. Your response then is the same as it is now. I agree with you. Would be curious to hear from Ralph on this now.
From your description, the contact occurred before possession was completed. That would = previous spot enforcement since loose-ball window was still open until A survived the ground.Since the contact knocked him to the ground and he had to survive the ground to complete the possession, then by rule he was never a runner. How can we tack on 15 to end of run if it wasn't a running play?
The original post clearly states that the receiver has possession BEFORE he is contacted by the defender. This is not DPI and as described thru the end of the play is a completed catch. The foul described here IMHO easily fits into the UNR category so based on my view of what is described I'm very comfortable with a tack-on foul. I'm not effectively penalizing team A here by going back to the previous spot or worse giving team B a "free one" if the DB spot is beyond the 15 yards that would be gained by the penalty.
"A leaps for the ball and controls while airborne then db contacts in a way that draws a targeting flag. Receiver maintains control of the ball through the contact and hitting the ground."What part of this "clearly states that the receiver has possession BEFORE he is contacted by the defender"?
By definition in all codes possession comes before control ie: possession & control. IMHO this is a black & white PF-UNR nothing more nothing less, unless the calling official wants to ADD the possible targeting component.
Without the targeting component, I don't see how this scenario could result in a tack on PF like you suggested earlier. You can't have PF UNR for defenseless hit against a runner. A runner is never defenseless. If there is no targeting and it's a UNR defenseless receiver, that MUST be previous spot because he has not completed the catch until after surviving the ground. He can't be defenseless and a runner at the same time, you need to make a judgment call.
Ralph's ruling is inconsistent with the intent of this rule. We want to eliminate this hit, not encourage this hit on a 25 yard pass that would only gain them 15 if enforced from the previous spot. I'm still 100% tacking this on. Its an absurd result not to.
As I recall, the intent of this rule was to prevent the "LIGHT UP THE RECIEVER SO HE CAN'T HOLD ON TO THE PASS ". Our stance was if the catch wasn't completed, previous spot enforcement. If the pass was completed, the reciever has now became a runner and you have a targeting foul with enforcement from the end of the run. Remember, if this contact occurred prior to the ball reaching the reciever you have pass interference. Hope this helps to calirfy.
