IR Screw Up?

[TexDoc]

In the Canadian / Newton game, 4th quarter, a Canadian receiver was forced oob, came back in bounds and caught the ball.  Just after the next snap, the game was stopped.  #1, the prior play is not review-able.  What exactly were they reviewing?  The IR official cannot throw a flag for illegal touching of a forward pass, so it should not have been reviewed.  #2, if the next snap happens, there is no review.  The R says that he was buzzed right before the snap, but IMHO, he should have ignored it, realizing that it was too late. 

It just looked really bad, mostly because it wasn't even review-able.

[TxBJ]

It took a long time too.

[ElvisLives]

  The IR official cannot throw a flag for illegal touching of a forward pass, so it should not have been reviewed.

REVIEWABLE FOULS
12-3-8
The following plays are reviewable and the replay official may create a foul when there is no call by the on-field officials:

e. Illegal touching of a forward pass by an originally eligible receiver who has gone out of bounds.
-----------------

It doesn't say voluntarily or involuntarily.  But, the fact that the RO can create a foul implies that he has the ability make a judgment regarding how he got out of bounds.  And that would be what he would be looking for, in addition to truly being out of bounds.

No opinion here regarding the next play in this game, but, in my days, I had buzzes very late in the snap count, just as the snap was starting.  Gotta stop the game, and review, as unpopular as that may be.

Robert

[blindtxzebra]

Anybody else notice in the Cuero game that IR put the ball on the 35 after the review of the kickoff that was touched by a player who was out of bounds.

[TxSkyBolt]

In the Canadian / Newton game, 4th quarter, a Canadian receiver was forced oob, came back in bounds and caught the ball.  Just after the next snap, the game was stopped.  #1, the prior play is not review-able.  What exactly were they reviewing?  The IR official cannot throw a flag for illegal touching of a forward pass, so it should not have been reviewed.  #2, if the next snap happens, there is no review.  The R says that he was buzzed right before the snap, but IMHO, he should have ignored it, realizing that it was too late. 

It just looked really bad, mostly because it wasn't even review-able.

If buzzed just prior to snap you’d better shut it down. That’s the procedure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JasonTX]

Anybody else notice in the Cuero game that IR put the ball on the 35 after the review of the kickoff that was touched by a player who was out of bounds.

They must have forgotten we kick from the 40.  What yard line was the ball on when it was touched by the out of bounds player?

[blindtxzebra]

They must have forgotten we kick from the 40.  What yard line was the ball on when it was touched by the out of bounds player?

22

[JasonTX]

22

Someone who was at the game was reading the R's lips and looked like he told his B, "30 plus 5".

[TxBJ]

It doesn't say voluntarily or involuntarily.  But, the fact that the RO can create a foul implies that he has the ability make a judgment regarding how he got out of bounds.  And that would be what he would be looking for, in addition to truly being out of bounds.

Robert

I’ve always understand that the determination of forced out vs. on his own comes from the field officials and replay cannot change that.

[TexDoc]

Anybody else notice in the Cuero game that IR put the ball on the 35 after the review of the kickoff that was touched by a player who was out of bounds.

My understanding is the RO can rule on oob or not oob, but not on the block, or force of the block.  So, in my mind, it made no sense to review.  He was obviously out, and it could not be reversed, so why stop it.

[ElvisLives]

My understanding is the RO can rule on oob or not oob, but not on the block, or force of the block.  So, in my mind, it made no sense to review.  He was obviously out, and it could not be reversed, so why stop it.

I stand corrected (by me😳).  In checking the IR Casebook (as I should have, to begin with), I see plays number 43 thru 47, which are about all the possible scenarios.  Despite the strict wording of the Rule, by these plays, the RO may NOT create a foul if the receiver was forced OB - which is interpreted as any amount of contact by an opponent.  In that event, whatever was ruled on the field must stand.  But, if he goes OB voluntarily, the RO can create the illegal touching foul.

So, I’m with TexDoc.  If the receiver was blocked out, and that action was obvious the first time the RO saw a replay, he should just let play continue.  But, it might not have been obvious - I can’t say.

Tail between my legs,
Robert

[TexDoc]

I stand corrected (by me😳).  In checking the IR Casebook (as I should have, to begin with), I see plays number 43 thru 47, which are about all the possible scenarios.  Despite the strict wording of the Rule, by these plays, the RO may NOT create a foul if the receiver was forced OB - which is interpreted as any amount of contact by an opponent.  In that event, whatever was ruled on the field must stand.  But, if he goes OB voluntarily, the RO can create the illegal touching foul.

So, I’m with TexDoc.  If the receiver was blocked out, and that action was obvious the first time the RO saw a replay, he should just let play continue.  But, it might not have been obvious - I can’t say.

Tail between my legs,
Robert

Thanks for confirming.  I thought that was correct. 

[billhpro1]

In the Newton-Canadian game, a field goal was attempted  by Canadian that was not good however the umpire had a flag against Newton for unsportsmanlike conduct. Referee in explaining the call said the defensive man jumped over the center. The only  Newton player in the Canadian backfield was a left def. end that beat his man. The Newton defensive linemen all stood up with their hands raised in attempt to block the kick  so where was the foul.

[JasonTX]

In the Newton-Canadian game, a field goal was attempted  by Canadian that was not good however the umpire had a flag against Newton for unsportsmanlike conduct. Referee in explaining the call said the defensive man jumped over the center. The only  Newton player in the Canadian backfield was a left def. end that beat his man. The Newton defensive linemen all stood up with their hands raised in attempt to block the kick  so where was the foul.

See this thread.  http://www.refstripes.com/forum/index.php?topic=14262.0