Blandino: Refs incorrectly handled key end-zone call at end of Lions-Seahawks

Dean Blandino -- Refs incorrectly handled crucial end-zone call at end of Lions-Seahawks

[bwburke94]

None of the officials had an angle that clearly showed it was an illegal bat.

Fun fact, the back judge in this game was (allegedly) the same guy who was originally slated to do the Fail Mary game before the lockout got in the way.

[bigjohn]

Really, he had a great look,, said it wasn't OVERT!!




Seahawks' game-saving play against Lions shouldn't have counted - CBSSports.com


Furthermore, Blandino denied that the official didn't know the rule. Instead, he claimed the official looking at the play didn't think it was "overt."

[Rich]

Let's face it -- only the officials knew the rule. Player could've easily controlled that ball in the end zone....HE didn't know it was illegal to bat it out.

BJ just missed it or judged it wasn't overt enough, which (IMO) was a mistake. Great position, though.

[OKREF]

If you watch they play from the above angle, the official rises up and reaches for what looks to be his flag then decides not to throw it.

[whitehat]

Great situation for learning...Assuming an illegal bat here, how would you rule on this in NFHS? Penalty for illegal bat? Touchback? Safety? Whose ball and where...?

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by whitehat

Great situation for learning...Assuming an illegal bat here, how would you rule on this in NFHS? Penalty for illegal bat? Touchback? Safety? Whose ball and where...?

I will admit that I had to think about and read up on this one, so I hope I'm correct.

The force was supplied by Team A's fumble, so it can't be a safety. The result of the play is a touchback. This is a running play as the fumble occurred beyond the neutral zone. Under ABO, enforce from the end of the run, the 1-yard line. It will be A's ball at the 1/2-yard line.

[whitehat]

SC Official, I too had to think a bit on this one and I agree with you.
Some commentary: Even though the defender slapped the ball out of the runners possession, by definition a new force cannot be added unless the ball has first been grounded. Therefore A, in this case, is responsible for putting the ball into (and therefore out of) the EZ so result of the play is a Touchback.

Despite B batting it out of the EZ they did not force it into the EZ and so they kind of get a pass on "force" in this situation as force only applies to how the ball gets into the EZ and not how it comes out the other end...
Then we go back to the bean bag where the run ended (where fumble occurred) and enforce the penalty against B and repeat the down (unless yardage is enough for first down).

If anyone has a different ruling please chime in.