Reviewable Procedure?

[bama_stripes]

Alabama vs Arkansas:

Punt was apparently fumbled, but receiver was ruled down by forward progress.  Arkansas challenged, but the challenge was denied by the booth as being unreviewable.  However, Arkansas was still charged with a time out.

Is that proper procedure, or should Arkansas have been told that it was unreviewable and thus saved the time out?

[Rulesman]

Proper procedure. Rule 12-5b-5.

[bama_stripes]

I don't have an NCAA book, but I'm guessing that says that teams are responsible for knowing what is or isn't reviewable.

If a coach asks an official "Is that reviewable?", what should be the response?

[TX Zebra]

It is the responsibility of the crew to "help" the coach in these cases. Wing officials have to know what can be reviewed and to tell communicate to the coach what is or isn't - usually in the context of his challenge. Since it is relatively new and also still changing in rules and philosophy from year to year, we are instructed to over-communicate in these situations.

Had this situation this past Sat with a fumble that was ripped out of the RB's hands from the middle of the pile. Clearly a fumble - the coach politely asked if forward progress could be reviewed, and I simply told him that it wasn't. I further told him he could challenge the fumble, but not forward progress.

Quick exchange, we both moved on quickly...

[Rulesman]

It is the responsibility of the crew to "help" the coach in these cases.

I'm all for preventive officiating, but are we not going to hold the coach accountable for knowing the rules?

[fearlessleader]

I know this particular play did not involve the line to gain, but just so there is no confusion, forward progress is reviewable, but only relative to a first down.  Otherwise, it is not.

12-3-3-e, page FR-102.