Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bob M.
REPLY: Ed...I must disagree. Take a good look at the definition of 'catch.' The receiver can complete a catch in one of two ways: (1) touching the ground inbounds (he didn't), or (2) being contacted by an opponent so that he's prevented from returning to the ground inbounds. This guy satisfied the second condition, so that he completed the catch inbounds, and the clock should continue to run. It's the full definition of catch that leads to the correct ruling.
|
Bob, I agreed with you until I tried to determine the logic used for the Case Book and frankly if I saw this play, the might still clock would still be running.
The action of B1 kept A1 from landing inbounds. If you look at 3.4.3 Ruling it supports stopping the clock because A1 landed out of bounds. When you add being pushed backwards out of bounds the only change is where A1 lands. Then look at 2.15.1(b) which agrees in principle with 3.4.3 that action by the opponent will affect the result of the play as it pertains to boundaries.
Futhermore, if A1 came down inbounds and then was pushed out of bounds by B1 the clock would be stopped.
When did the down end? The act of catching the ball would not end the down. The only time a catch would end the down is if A1 and B1 jointly possessed the ball. That would end the down and keep the clock moving as the ball would become dead inbounds.
If B1 managed to tackle A1 inbounds that would end the down and keep the clock moving.
I think the point of 3.4.3 is the play remains alive until the ball is out of bounds. The catch is just a part of the live ball play.