Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder
" he then rails against those of us who want to call the play a touchdown...
Except that none of us are saying that. AJ - can I be more clearer than this: "NO ONE THINKS THIS IS LEGAL PARTICIPATION". It's just not incomplete or a dead ball. it is IP (or IT in NCAA).
|
Mike, perhaps you're not reading what I'm trying to say. You may never have suggested Illegal Participation was involved in this scenario, but others have, and we are in agreement that Illegal Participation is NOT appropriate in the NFHS world. That is one area we appear to be in agreement on.
I have no interest in NCAA rules. As I understand Illegal Participation, on the NFHS level, I'm looking at NF: 9-6-1 & 2 which clearly state the conditions under which a player comits this foul,
which requires not only going OOB, but returning. The mechanic used in our area, to focus on that required sequence, calls for a beanbag to be thrown when an A (or K) player crosses the line and a flag when he crosses back inbounds (See "Comment" Case Book 9.6.1.A)
I don't see how a player who has completed all the requirements of being OOB can violate any provision of NF: 9-6, without "returning inbounds", nor do I understand how a player can magically satisfy the requirement of "returning inbounds" by simply jumping up into the air while remaining outside the playing field boundries.
If I've confused you, Mike, allow me to try and clarify.
Since the action by A88 (in the ridiculous sample play) does NOT qualify for either Illegal Participation or Illegal Touching (under NFHS Illegal Touching is something an
ineligible receiver does), the result of the play (redirecting the live ball back across the sideline to an inbounds teammate who advances across the goal line), the result of the play
MUST be a TD, because there's no reason for it not to be.
You seem to agree that
allowing this score to stand DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, but I don't see how or why you can prevent that without considering the ball dead when touched OOB by your airborne, OOB A88. If you insist the ball remains alive, and admit that no penalty has been committed, NF: 8-2-1 "Possession of a live ball in the opponent's End Zone is
always a touchdown." takes over.
This does get to be a confusing string as some insist on twisting the original question to try and support their position. Mike, if you would read what I've said, instead of assuming what you thought I meant to say, it might seem clearer and easier to follow.
My position is relatively simple, due to the absence of any foul being committed by A88, the play has to stand, or for some reason, fail to stand. Interpreting the touching by A88 to have been by an OOB player, even though he is not consistently touching the ground, which seems a reasonable interpretation, provides the appropriate ruling. There's no flag on the ground, because nobody has earned one, and we can move on.