Pylon

[Altor]

But my entire point is that in order to hit the face of the pylon that is facing the opposite end line, the ball must have cross the sideline first before it hit the pylon.

If the kick that lands 5 yards OOB is not a touchback because it crosses the sideline before it crosses the goal line, why is it a touchback just because it hits the pylon?

[OKREF]

The front face of the pylon is the front edge of the goal line. Any ball that hits the pylon breaks the front edge of the goal line. All the pylon does is give us a tool to judge if the ball crosses the goal line or doesn't.

[Robert Goodman]

Maybe Altor's example needs to be even more starkly stated:

(a) A1's punt from close to the sideline crosses the sideline immediately, but an in-field wind keeps the ball close as it travels in the air, and the 1st thing it hits is the front face of the goal line pylon 40 yards downfield. What's your spot? I'd say where it crossed the sideline.

Now say the pylon is missing -- happens a lot with the weighted ones we use that blow over or away easily -- and the ball takes the same path as in a, but hits the ground

(b) a foot outside the sideline in goal, or
(c) a foot inside the sideline in the end zone.

I'd say in b that the spot would be the same as in a, but c would result in a touchback. In c the status of the ball was never "out of bounds".

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Maybe Altor's example needs to be even more starkly stated:

(a) A1's punt from close to the sideline crosses the sideline immediately, but an in-field wind keeps the ball close as it travels in the air, and the 1st thing it hits is the front face of the goal line pylon 40 yards downfield. What's your spot? I'd say where it crossed the sideline.

Now say the pylon is missing -- happens a lot with the weighted ones we use that blow over or away easily -- and the ball takes the same path as in a, but hits the ground

(b) a foot outside the sideline in goal, or
(c) a foot inside the sideline in the end zone.

I'd say in b that the spot would be the same as in a, but c would result in a touchback. In c the status of the ball was never "out of bounds".

Its not OOB until it hits something OOB. When do you stop the clock on a pass that is thrown OOB? When it crosses the line or when it hits something OOB?

I would say all 3 would be touchbacks

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Its not OOB until it hits something OOB. When do you stop the clock on a pass that is thrown OOB? When it crosses the line or when it hits something OOB?

I would say all 3 would be touchbacks

You might want to reread the rule on punts out of bounds in particular.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

You might want to reread the rule on punts out of bounds in particular.

That's true. My mistake.

[whitehat]

Lets look at it in "reverse" for a second and see what that does.

What if the pylon definition said a pylon properly placed is completely "in" bounds?
This would seem to make more sense if we then say, If the ball touches the pylon while in player possession going in its a TD, Or, If the pylon is hit by kick we have a TB since all kicks not going out of bounds but breaking the plane of the goal line, in bounds (where the pylon by our new definition now is) are Touch backs.

This would eliminate us confusing how the ball can touch something that is completely "out" of bounds and yet the ball remains "in" bounds (so to speak) in the EZ.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Its not OOB until it hits something OOB. When do you stop the clock on a pass that is thrown OOB? When it crosses the line or when it hits something OOB?

I would say all 3 would be touchbacks

Correct as to when the ball is out of bounds. But how about as to the out-of-bounds spot as per 4-3-1?

I hope you're not saying the live ball's touching the plane of the goal line supersedes the spotting of the ball via the out-of-bounds spot, because then in Altor's example of the ball's landing 5 yds. OOB 2 yds. beyond the goal line, that'd be a touchback too, provided the plane of the goal line extends indefinitely past the sideline. I'm sure the rules makers didn't intend it to be a touchback in that case, so why would it automatically be a touchback if it touched an object just inches out of bounds?

I think the practical answer in the case of the loose ball's hitting the pylon is that the pylon is supposed to represent a dimensionless point at the intersection of the goal & side lines, even though in reality it occupies space. So touching any part of it is deemed to be touching that point.