Bulletin 2 (2 x 2 updates)

[JasonTX]

This bulletin covers the question about a substitute filling a vacancy of an initial 2 x 1 numbering exception formation in which there are only 10 players on the field for team A.  A change for earlier reports.

[dammitbobby]

Reviewable Plays
12-3-2-b   Forward pass touching the ground or touched by a player (eligible or ineligible) or an official, including whether the touching is beyond or behind the line of scrimmage.

from the bulletin:
Illegal Touching – Rule 7-3-11

Play #3: Team A lines up to punt in a 2 X 2 formation utilizing numbering exceptions. Punter A1 muffs the snap, picks up the ball, and scrambles toward the sideline before throwing a forward pass to A34 for a 1st down. A34 lined up at right guard at the snap. There are no flags initially, but the crew gets together to discuss the play.

RULING: Illegal touching by A34. This is not a reviewable play situation as it relates to the formation or A34’s eligibility to touch the pass. However, if replay has objective and clear information, they can assist the crew via O2O.

Am I missing something? Why would replay not be able to look at this for illegal touching?

[blindtxzebra]

Reviewable Plays
12-3-2-b   Forward pass touching the ground or touched by a player (eligible or ineligible) or an official, including whether the touching is beyond or behind the line of scrimmage.

from the bulletin:
Illegal Touching – Rule 7-3-11

Play #3: Team A lines up to punt in a 2 X 2 formation utilizing numbering exceptions. Punter A1 muffs the snap, picks up the ball, and scrambles toward the sideline before throwing a forward pass to A34 for a 1st down. A34 lined up at right guard at the snap. There are no flags initially, but the crew gets together to discuss the play.

RULING: Illegal touching by A34. This is not a reviewable play situation as it relates to the formation or A34’s eligibility to touch the pass. However, if replay has objective and clear information, they can assist the crew via O2O.

Am I missing something? Why would replay not be able to look at this for illegal touching?

The eligibility aspect refers to either a defender or a receiver who has gone OOB and re-established himself.

[dammitbobby]

The eligibility aspect refers to either a defender or a receiver who has gone OOB and re-established himself.

That's specifically addressed in 12-3-3-h: 
Catch, recovery or touching of a loose ball by a player inbounds or out of bounds, or an eligible receiver who had been out of bounds and returned inbounds.

In any case, that rule cannot apply, since the receiver was ineligible by rule.

[dammitbobby]

Here's the explanation I got from a long-time P5 RO:

This is consistent with the theory that replay can rule on touching by an ineligible player when that player can be identified BY NUMBER (50-79), but not by POSITION (e.g., a "covered up" receiver).  The latter has, of course, never been reviewable, and is enshrined in the case book.

So, when we are talking about an otherwise-eligible number in a 2 X 2 formation, this follows the "BY POSITION" from above, and I support the interpretation.  People have been asking me for months if this was reviewable, and I have been telling them pretty much what the interpretation says -- not reviewable, but if the officials are down there struggling with where the receiver came from, a voice from up above might be able to help them.

[bossman72]

Am I missing something? Why would replay not be able to look at this for illegal touching?

Replay cannot determine the initial eligibility of a player not wearing 50-79 because that requires subjective judgment, much like illegal formation.
So if TE A80 catches a pass, replay cannot stop the game and create illegal touching because A80 was covered up.
So to extend that to this play, they cannot determine who is eligible and who isn't.

I'm just even more surprised that Matt Young put how to circumvent the rule in writing.