Thread: Brain teaser
View Single Post
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 05, 2010, 04:16pm
MD Longhorn MD Longhorn is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmc View Post
Excuse me Mike, but nobody is inventing a damn thing except those who have recently manufactured this absolutely silly interpretation that a player who has clearly established himself as being OOB can somehow, miraculously retain his status of being Inbounds by simply jmping up into the air while remaining out side the boundry lines. Thus far NOBODY has been able to rationally explain the common sense of that bizarre interpretation. If you suggest this is "consistent with other rules in the book" you are reading something other than any NFHS rule Book ever written. As for your example of a player being FORCED OOB, that is a completely different matter.
I'm really not sure what got you so belligerent. I'm not "recently inventing" anything. The book quite clearly states what makes a player out of bounds. I will restate what I said earlier since you seem to have intentionally misunderstood. Your concept / interpretation / whatever that a player that was previously out of bounds but currently in the air is still out of bounds is NOT consistent with the case of a player forced OOB. Such a player is not out of bounds, although he's not yet IN bounds either. You seem to assume that not out of bounds somehow means IN bounds. Obviously, you can be neither. Any airborne player ANYWHERE is neither in nor out of bounds at that moment. This IS consistent with the forced OOB player returning and landing in.


Quote:
If you would like an example of how downright stupid your idea is try this; A88 runs OOB and continues behind the team area where he jumps up into the air and, while ariborne, redirects a pass thrown over the team area, to A89 who has never left the field of play, but has wandered 30 yards downfield and catches the redirected pass and advances for a TD.
Yeah, that's stupid alright. Your point? The question was ... by what RULE (not made up rule... real rule) would you rule this not to be a score.

Quote:
You're going to allow the score? If so that's on you, I'm going to kill the play as an incomplete pass the instant A88 touches the ball behind his team area, and move on to the next down. Good luck with your score.
Try really hard not to put words in people's mouths. Did I EVER state that I would allow this score? No. Not even close, and no, I wouldn't. However, just calling it an incomplete pass is quite simply incorrect. Should the offense try something like this and instead have the defense catch the ball - you dang well better let defense keep the ball. Me saying your "interpretation" is not only wrong, but complete fabrication does NOT imply I would let this play score.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote