Does OOB end your ability to catch a pass?

[jlesseig]

In a recent study session a discussion got a bit animated when discussing 9-6-1:

Prior to a change of possession, or when there is no change of possession, no player of A or K shall go out of bounds and return to the field during the down unless blocked out of bounds by an opponent. If a player is blocked out of bounds by an opponent and returns to the field, during the down, he shall return at the first opportunity.

The key point to the discussion simply put was:

1) can the A or K player who is pushed out and returns immediately then directly participate in the play, particularly catch a pass?

Or, as was argued,

2) "they are done once they are OOB - forced or not"?

The discussion was somewhat one-sided but I wanted to put this to the board to get some feedback as we did agree the rule could be more specific in addressing the point of being allowed to continue the down fully or not.

[HLinNC]

If they are forced out, they must return at their first opportunity.  If so, no foul, so no the "they are done" crowd is incorrect.  The rule gives an A player forced out a chance to remain legal.

NF has no rules regarding first to touch a pass like NCAA does.

[Ump33]

7-5-6d - A player who is eligible at the start of the down remains eligible throughout the down.

Case Book 9.6.1 Situation A: With third down and 20 from B’s 40-yard line, A1 accidentally steps out of bounds at B’s 30 while running a sideline pattern. A1 returns inbounds at the 28. Quarterback A2’s forward pass is: (a) overthrown and incomplete; or (b) caught by A1 at B’s 25; or (c) in flight to A1 when B1 contacts him and it falls incomplete. Ruling: In (a) and (b), it is illegal participation by A1. In (c), A1’s illegal participation and B1’s interference result in a double foul and replay of the down. Comment: When A1 goes out of bounds voluntarily or by accident, or delays his return after being blocked out by an opponent, he commits an illegal participation foul when he returns inbounds. The spot of the foul is where he returns inbounds. (10-2-1)

[jlesseig]

Thank you both for your feedback.

[wheel75]

I agree with everything said so far.  The big thing to remember, in the event A voluntarily leaves and returns, while he's committed an illegal participation foul, he's not an ineligible for purpose of pass interference and ineligible downfield rules.   

[mbyron]

I agree with everything said so far.  The big thing to remember, in the event A voluntarily leaves and returns, while he's committed an illegal participation foul, he's not an ineligible for purpose of pass interference and ineligible downfield rules.   

You're correct by rule to use the word 'voluntarily', but I find that usage misleading. If A accidentally steps out of bounds, for example while making a cut, then he has "voluntarily" gone OOB.

IMO, the rule would be clearer if it stated that A is guilty of IP for going out of bounds and subsequently participating unless he is blocked out.

[dcbarisax1]

mbyron, I absolutely agree with your interpretation verbage!    Do we know anyone on the rules committee?   

[Rulesman]

...Do we know anyone on the rules committee?   

Don Brodell represents Arkansas on the Rules Committee.

[GFinn]

When do you throw the IP flag after voluntarily going out of bounds? Throw when comes back in or actually participates especially when play goes other way and he doesnt "participate"

Thank you.

[mbyron]

When do you throw the IP flag after voluntarily going out of bounds? Throw when comes back in or actually participates especially when play goes other way and he doesnt "participate"

Thank you.

I posted this on another site:

I would like to see NFHS clarify 9-6-1 and 9-6-2. The letter of the rule, especially 9-6-2, states that it's a foul to return to the field. "No player shall intentionally go out of bounds during the down and: (a) Return to the field."

However, the concept and philosophy of illegal participation is that merely stepping on the field, with nobody else around, is not participation and does not warrant a flag. Provided that one understands 'participation' broadly enough — not just catching a pass, but also occupying a blocker, for instance — it's reasonable to require the player who went OOB to participate before penalizing his team 15 yards for illegal PARTICIPATION.

Between that and the slippage about what constitutes "intentionally" going OOB, this rule needs some editorial revision. I'd be happy to consult, if you're reading this post, NFHS rules committee members.