The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 09:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by CT1 View Post
Was this even IG? Wasn't done to conserve time or avoid loss of yardage.
True. A backward pass to the sideline would've accomplished the same result, and then IG wouldn't've even been considered.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 09:27am
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by CT1 View Post
Was this even IG? Wasn't done to conserve time or avoid loss of yardage.
OL let DL by, and two of them were right on the QB. Had to throw or risk being sacked. A sack by definition is a loss of yards.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 10:50am
NFHS Official
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by CT1 View Post
Was this even IG? Wasn't done to conserve time or avoid loss of yardage.
Still in pocket, no receiver in area. Had he rolled out about 5 feet he would have been fine.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 01:26pm
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,557
I'd love to know if one of the officials suggested there isn't an untimed down, and that the game is therefore over, yet was "over-ruled" by a majority or convincing comrade.

At least they all know the rule now. As does the whole country.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 02:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by JugglingReferee View Post
OL let DL by, and two of them were right on the QB. Had to throw or risk being sacked. A sack by definition is a loss of yards.
But look at 7-3-2. The relevant provisions are all "The passer to conserve time..." and "The passer to conserve yardage..." What's material to this case is not whether a loss of yardage would've occurred, but what the passer's motiv'n was. The ball was not thrown to conserve either time or field position, but to consume time. So I don't see intentional grounding.

Suppose it were an opposite kind of situation. Time for the half expires during the down before A1 throws an intentionally incomplete forward pass under conditions where it looks like team A would've liked another down. It would not in fact have conserved time, but the passer's purpose was to conserve time, so it's intentional grounding. I doubt anyone would care about the enforcement, because the period ends anyway, but that's what's meant by those "The passer to..." phrases: to outlaw certain passes on the basis of the passer's purpose, not the result.
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 02:38pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by OKREF View Post
Still in pocket, no receiver in area.
Those conditions are necessary but not sufficient to call intentional grounding. It still has to be done to conserve time or the spot, and this was for neither.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 02:42pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
Those conditions are necessary but not sufficient to call intentional grounding. It still has to be done to conserve time or the spot, and this was for neither.


Supposed to read minds or ask the QB? The throw conserved yards. That's all I, as a WH, care about. Grounding.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 02:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 537
On field ACC crew and Big 12 replay crew suspended 2 games
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 02:50pm
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
But look at 7-3-2. The relevant provisions are all "The passer to conserve time..." and "The passer to conserve yardage..." What's material to this case is not whether a loss of yardage would've occurred, but what the passer's motiv'n was. The ball was not thrown to conserve either time or field position, but to consume time. So I don't see intentional grounding.

Suppose it were an opposite kind of situation. Time for the half expires during the down before A1 throws an intentionally incomplete forward pass under conditions where it looks like team A would've liked another down. It would not in fact have conserved time, but the passer's purpose was to conserve time, so it's intentional grounding. I doubt anyone would care about the enforcement, because the period ends anyway, but that's what's meant by those "The passer to..." phrases: to outlaw certain passes on the basis of the passer's purpose, not the result.
His motivation was to avoid being sacked. That he threw it high, far, and to an area with no receiver is an additional aspect to the play that doesn't remove the fact that two defenders would have easily tackled him without the throw.

Avoiding the sack conserves yardage (item h): the incomplete pass means that B would take over further from A's EZ than if he was sacked.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 03:27pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrounge View Post
On field ACC crew and Big 12 replay crew suspended 2 games
MAC, not ACC
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 04:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
Supposed to read minds or ask the QB?
That's what intentional grounding's always been about.
Quote:
The throw conserved yards. That's all I, as a WH, care about. Grounding.
It shouldn't be all you care about, because there are plenty of incomplete passes that conserve yards but that you'd never call intentional grounding because they weren't intended to conserve yards. For instance, the passer & receiver get crossed up as to the route, so the ball winds up going nowhere near a receiver. You'd call intentional grounding only if it looked like the passer's purpose in throwing it was to avoid a loss or to stop the clock. That was manifestly not the case here. The player throwing the pass cared nothing about where the ball would be spotted for the next down, and did not care to leave any time on the period clock.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 04:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by JugglingReferee View Post
His motivation was to avoid being sacked. That he threw it high, far, and to an area with no receiver is an additional aspect to the play that doesn't remove the fact that two defenders would have easily tackled him without the throw.

Avoiding the sack conserves yardage (item h): the incomplete pass means that B would take over further from A's EZ than if he was sacked.
But throwing the ball to avoid being tackled is immaterial unless it's to (the word used in the book) conserve time or get a more favorable spot. The word "to" requires purpose. The player did not care where the next spot would be. He didn't want to leave time on the game clock, either. So the conditions for IG don't apply.

This is a tactic which is not against the rules: throwing the ball high (in any direction), not trying for a completed pass, to consume time.
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 11, 2016, 04:34pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,761
Try this: A1 on 4th & 20 runs 10 yards past his LOS, then throws the ball forward, high, and far out of bounds to use up an extra 2 seconds to end either half. It's still an illegal forward pass. Still loss of down. Does the player care where the next spot is going to be? No. So why would you penalize for IG if he were behind the LOS and threw a forward pass for the same purpose? He still doesn't care what the next spot was going to be.

How about if he throws it nearly directly sideways? Are you going to take pains to figure out whether it was a forward or backward pass, so you can see whether you could call IG?

This is not a situation for which the IG provisions were adopted.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 12, 2016, 01:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
This is a tactic which is not against the rules: throwing the ball high (in any direction), not trying for a completed pass, to consume time.
Robert, you're trying to float a LEAD canoe. The IG call by the crew was a technically correct call, unfortunately a really GLARING mistake was made on the enforcement.

Occasional mistakes are something each and everyone of has made, somewhat repeatedly, but thankfully not as highlighted as this one. The crew was wrong, is accountable, will suffer some consequences and hopefully get past the embarrassment and second guessing before their next on field assignment, and God willing, "the beat will go on".
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 12, 2016, 02:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 558
Send a message via AIM to BoomerSooner
Quote:
Originally Posted by JugglingReferee View Post
I'd love to know if one of the officials suggested there isn't an untimed down, and that the game is therefore over, yet was "over-ruled" by a majority or convincing comrade.

At least they all know the rule now. As does the whole country.
This is what happened to me and why my initial post sided with how it was handled on the field. I assumed that guys at that level had to be right. As I posted in another thread, my gut reaction was that it wasn't right and I said as much to my son. He questioned me because he knows I usually reserve those kind of statements until I know with certainty that a mistake was made. By the time I posted the OP in this thread, I had convinced myself I was wrong and that I must be missing something in the NCAA rules.
__________________
My job is a decision-making job, and as a result, I make a lot of decisions." --George W. Bush
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Maryland/Michigan State crazy finish (Video) bballref3966 Basketball 25 Sun Jan 18, 2015 04:17pm
Eastern Michigan-Michigan Backcourt Violation? (Video) TriggerMN Basketball 13 Wed Dec 10, 2014 05:15pm
Ordering from Central California ASA drog008 Softball 1 Mon Apr 05, 2010 04:57pm
Looking for summer bball central fla? TheMagicalHeat Basketball 0 Sun Feb 01, 2009 05:47pm
Any Central Oregon Umps out there?? spots101 Baseball 0 Sun Jul 28, 2002 10:57pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:56pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1