Spike the ball to stop the clock

[voiceoflg]

I saw something Friday night (FED) I have never seen before, so I am coming to you all to help educate me.

Clock is winding down so the offense looks to spike the ball to stop the clock. I know the QB has to be under center. Here, the QB is in the shotgun, takes the snap, turns around so his back is to the LOS and spikes the ball. Officials blow the whistle, signal incomplete pass and stop the clock.

Is this the correct ruling? I have no idea, just never saw that before.

[Rich]

No. Backward pass. Play it.

[HLin NC]

Wrong in so many ways.

[bwburke94]

Assuming that the spike was a forward pass (which it may not have been given the description), this seems like intentional grounding.

If the spike was not a forward pass, it is treated the same as any other backward pass and is a live ball. Not a foul because IG requires a forward pass.

[Texas Aggie]

Same in NCAA except [Fed guys ignore the rest...]








passer doesn't have to be under center.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by voiceoflg

I saw something Friday night (FED) I have never seen before, so I am coming to you all to help educate me.

Clock is winding down so the offense looks to spike the ball to stop the clock. I know the QB has to be under center. Here, the QB is in the shotgun, takes the snap, turns around so his back is to the LOS and spikes the ball. Officials blow the whistle, signal incomplete pass and stop the clock.

Is this the correct ruling? I have no idea, just never saw that before.

Assuming the ball went backward relative to the field, the correct ruling is for the inadvertent whistle.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Assuming the ball went backward relative to the field, the correct ruling is for the inadvertent whistle.

Would you actually make that mechanical a ruling?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Would you actually make that mechanical a ruling?

When it's the player, rather than an official, who does something stupid, yes.

[MD Longhorn]

The confusion between you two, and why it seems like the other is picking nits is this:

The QB was facing AWAY from the LOS. Unless he threw it straight down toward his feet - the pass likely went backward. but if this was the case, wouldn't even the rookiest of rookies realize that the "spike" was a backward pass?

If he threw it nearly straight down and back toward the LOS (or close enough that R is not positive), it's forward. But this pass seems awkward.

I would be asking why the heck the QB turned to face away from the LOS.

[HLin NC]

I would be asking why the heck the QB turned to face away from the LOS.

Purely speculative but my guess is that is what a/the coach told him to do because he figured out if it isn't a forward pass it wouldn't be IG. The kid MIGHT have come up with it on his own though. Then somebody in stripes blows his whistle and cobbles the whole thing up.

R- "Coach, you remember that question I asked you in pre-game about any unusual plays you might run......?"

[jblowery]

So if the pass was backward and there was an IW because the ref thought the pass was forward the clock would re-start on the ready for play, right?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by jblowery

So if the pass was backward and there was an IW because the ref thought the pass was forward the clock would re-start on the ready for play, right?

The clock always starts on the RFP after an IW.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Rich

The clock always starts on the RFP after an IW.

Then what's the significance of the qualifying phrase, "if the clock was stopped for any reason other than specified in Rule 3-4-3 or an untimed down"? Doesn't that mean that if the clock is stopped for reasons specified in 3-4-3, that would supersede 3-4-2(c), and the clock would start on the snap?

[Rich]

An IW is the only reason a clock would stop if there was an IW. It's essentially the definition.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Rich

An IW is the only reason a clock would stop if there was an IW. It's essentially the definition.

I don't understand that, nor what it's supposed to be the definition of.