Quote:
Originally Posted by RochesterRef
In NY, we're being told that if the ball carrier crosses the goal line while being brought to the ground by HC, it by definition is no longer a HC as the ball is dead when it breaks the plane of the GL, but we can and should throw a PF on it, just not call it HC. As someone else said in this post, it's still the same penalty in effect, just a difference in semantics
|
There's an inconsistency in the 2009 Rule Book. The rule defining HCT refers to the runner, which by definition requires a live ball.
On the other hand, the "Comments on the 2009 Rules Revisions" on p. 86 has this about HCT:
"HORSE-COLLAR TACKLE ADDED TO ILLEGAL PERSONAL CONTACT (9-4-3k – NEW): This
change now defines a horse-collar tackle and adds this act to the list of illegal personal contact
fouls in Rule 9-4-3k regardless of where it occurs on the field. The new provision
makes it illegal to grasp the inside back or side opening of the collar of the jersey or shoulder
pads of the runner and subsequently pull the runner to the ground. The
Rules Committee felt the need to continue to address risk minimization issues for the runner."
If they're serious about risk minimization and the bolded clause, then that would imply that we should call it in the endzone too, even though the ball carrier is no longer a runner.
I expect that the rules committee is already aware of the discrepancy and will make an editorial change next year.
In the meantime, flagging it for a HCT or for a PF hardly matters, as long as you're flagging it.