RefStripes.com

Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: TXMike on October 21, 2012, 07:52:28 PM

Title: Roughing the Passer or Just a Pers Foul
Post by: TXMike on October 21, 2012, 07:52:28 PM

QB A8 is under a heavy rush as he sprints left.  As he is throwing the ball, a defender's hand grabs and twists the facemask before the ball is released.  Ball is released and pass completed for a 20 yard gain.   Roughing the Passer or just facemask personal foul ?

And then the variation, the pass is released and just after the ball leaves the QB's hand, the defender grasps and twists the facemask?   Same thing?

Title: Re: Roughing the Passer or Just a Pers Foul
Post by: ump_ben on October 21, 2012, 08:45:42 PM

In the Utah OSU game last night, they threw roughing the passer on your second scenario.

Title: Re: Roughing the Passer or Just a Pers Foul
Post by: Kalle on October 21, 2012, 11:22:46 PM

Technically both scenarios are personal fouls but I think all supervisors would support calling these RTP.

RTP applies only to charging and throwing.

Title: Re: Roughing the Passer or Just a Pers Foul
Post by: TxSkyBolt on October 22, 2012, 06:47:39 AM

Agree with Kalle.  If it's not called RFP and the pass is caught more than 15 yards downfield, the defense gets a free one.

Title: Re: Roughing the Passer or Just a Pers Foul
Post by: NVFOA_Ump on October 22, 2012, 08:12:23 AM

This "hole" in the rules has been there for awhile.  Should we really decide to "fix it" by effectively revising the clear Rule 9-1-9 language that states "No defensive player shall charge into a passer or throw him to the ground when it is obvious the ball has been thrown."?

We're going to "add" in a totally different foul to RTP (9-1-8)?

Title: Re: Roughing the Passer or Just a Pers Foul
Post by: TXMike on October 22, 2012, 08:18:51 AM

Could just say" No defensive player shall charge into a passer,  throw him to the ground., or commit any foul against him,  when it is obvious the ball has been thrown."

Title: Re: Roughing the Passer or Just a Pers Foul
Post by: Rulesman on October 22, 2012, 10:55:45 AM

I believe the intent is to afford the passer a little extra protection since he is generally in a vulnerable position. You could really have 2 fouls here. What's wrong with giving Team A the option to accept either?

Title: Re: Roughing the Passer or Just a Pers Foul
Post by: TXMike on October 22, 2012, 01:07:21 PM

A kicker is more vulnerable than a passer and he does not get "extra" protection. If "extra" protection is warranted then the rule should be written to give it

Title: Re: Roughing the Passer or Just a Pers Foul
Post by: Rulesman on October 22, 2012, 01:54:34 PM

Quote from: TXMike on October 22, 2012, 01:07:21 PM

A kicker is more vulnerable than a passer and he does not get "extra" protection. If "extra" protection is warranted then the rule should be written to give it

OK, I'll agree with that. But as written, I still believe you have 2 fouls, either of which Team A can elect to enforce.

Title: Re: Roughing the Passer or Just a Pers Foul
Post by: TXMike on October 22, 2012, 03:11:56 PM

You are basing your claim on established practice and not on anything  more official than that right?