« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: A.R. 7-3-6 IX ?  (Read 3833 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8775
  • FAN REACTION: +229/-269
  • When you quit learning you quit living
A.R. 7-3-6 IX ?
« on: December 22, 2012, 11:30:15 PM »
Logged

Offline Aussie-Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 525
  • FAN REACTION: +8/-3
  • Australian Gridiron Officials Association
    • Gridironwest
Re: A.R. 7-3-6 IX ?
« Reply #1 on: December 23, 2012, 04:45:57 AM »
No he wasn't inbounds so doesn't apply but AR 7-3-6 XI does - incomplete pass
Logged
For every coach that thinks we got it wrong there's another that thinks we got it right.

Offline Kalle

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3445
  • FAN REACTION: +114/-35
Re: A.R. 7-3-6 IX ?
« Reply #2 on: December 23, 2012, 09:40:22 AM »
If he's ruled being airborne, it should have been an incomplete pass, by either of the A.R's quoted. If we assume that a player running normally is not considered an airborne receiver even if he secures the ball while both of his feet are off the ground, then we have to consider if the slight upwards move just before the catch is enough to make him airborne. A close call, either way.
Logged

Offline FLbackjudge

  • *
  • Posts: 130
  • FAN REACTION: +2/-0
Re: A.R. 7-3-6 IX ?
« Reply #3 on: December 25, 2012, 01:16:42 PM »
I don't know if any modifications to the NCAA rules apply here or if the philosophies that have been adopted by every DI conference are used by UIL, but in every college game I know of, this is an incomplete pass.  The player went to the ground and failed to control the ball.
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »