New Rule - Int. Grounding (video)

[TXMike]

Good example of new rule re intentional grounding.  Probably would have been called as a foul in the past but not now as there was an eligible receiver "in the area".

As for the other part of the video (illegal touching of the forward pass), perhaps there was something not seen in the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQM6jHOEdyU

[mccormicw]

Illegal touching (Rule 7-3-1) states "no originally inelegible player while inbounds shall intentionally touch a legal forward pass...".  IMO, the lineman made no effort to touch the ball.  The ball may or may not have hit him (lineman) but he did not intentionally touch the ball.

[Atlanta Blue]

What eligible receiver was "in the area"?  The ball was thorwn past #3, so he wasn't in the area of where the pass was thrown.  If that's who was counted as "in the area", I think they missed the intent of the rule change.  The purpose of the change still requires the ball to be thrown toward an eligible receiver, it simply removes the part that it be catchable.

If there is another eligible receiver, I didn't see him.

I did see #3 illegally block below the waist.

[TXMike]

Texas HS game   NCAA Rules

No illegal block by 3     The ball lands less than 2 yards from 3 so he is "in the area"      No foul for int grounding.

[bama_stripes]

I'm guessing that Illegal Touching doesn't carry a LOD provision in NCAA?

[110]

My dim memory of NHFS rules state that the line player must intentionally touch the ball, and I recall some provision for being beyond the LOS?

Anyhow, I have nothing on this play.

[El Macman]

Look at the video carefully. The previously untouched pass bounces off the upper left leg of the charging defensive player, so everybody are eligible after that. As TxMike points out, even though #3 had no hope of catching this pass, he WAS close enough to have this 'dumping' of the ball ruled legal for 2011. Look at the QB - he very deliberately throws the ball downward with great force, so that no one could catch it, but also trying to hit the ground near where #3 was sitting. No foul. Of any kind. Next down.

[chymechowder]

Agree that this is no foul under the new "happy dumping" rule, due to A3 being in the vicinity.

But I don't think the ball first hitting a defender has any bearing.  Let's say A3 wasn't in the backfield. say it was just the QB, two offensive guards, and the horde of defenders closing in.  If the QB dumped the ball into a defender's thigh, we'd have a grounding foul. 

Yes, all become eligible after B's touch. but for the purpose of evading a grounding foul, the eligible receiver has to be in the area when the pass is thrown. In the split-second after a dumped ball grazes a defender's thigh, an offensive lineman being nearby ("Look, Ma, I'm eligible!) doesn't get the qb off the hook.

granted, the new rule gives the QB a ton of leeway, but it can't give THAT MUCH leeway, right?

[El Macman]

No, the touching of the ball by B doesn't remove the possibility of ING, and I didn't intend to imply as much. I was just removing the possibility of illegal touching from the discussion.