Thu Jul 29, 2004, 12:09pm
|
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,557
|
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Bob M.
Quote:
Originally posted by ABoselli
Yep, that's exactly what I meant. I guess I could have said 'secured possession of the ball' as catch implies completing the act of alighting in the field of play or end zone inbounds.
Now that I think about it, you could have IP if he goes airborn, touches the pylon, and catches the ball after which he alights in the end zone.
I think Fed and NCAA would agree on this.
|
REPLY: That's what I figured you meant. Just wanted to be sure. So incomplete is the correct ruling on the first play. Agree? And you're thinking along the same lines as I was on that second play. For Fed, it's technically IP during a loose ball play. But that's really a tough call. For NCAA, it's not IP, but rather a type of illegal touching since in NCAA a receiver loses his eligibilty when he voluntarily goes OOB and returns. The penalty is loss of down at the previous spot--the same as if you ruled an incomplete pass. Personally (and don't tell the rules lawyers) I'd be inclined to call the second play an incomplete pass in Fed as well even though it's technically IP. The penalty is just too harsh. And really how much different is it than your first play. I may now take some heat for that statement, but oh well...
|
I agree with you Bob, no heat from me. I'm probaly not going to call that IP even though it technically is, it is a pretty harsh penalty and the player did not gain any advantage.
|