Question regarding roughing the passer....

[FBFAN]

Okay, here's my question.

The offense snaps the ball and the QB pitches to the RB. The running back runs outside and then throws the ball back to a receiver downfield. After the ball is gone, he gets hit by a linebacker.

Is this roughing the passer, even though it was a running back with the ball?

Thanks in advance

[Dommer1]

NCAA: The player throwing a backward pass is not, by definition, a passer (the player who throws a legal fwd pass is), therefore no roughing the passer. You could still have a personal foul though, if the contact is severe enough.

[JasonTX]

To simplify it, the foul is not "Roughing the QB". The foul is "Rouging the Passer" In your question you stated who passed the ball. The position the player was in makes no difference. The Passer is defined as any player who throws a legal forward pass, in your case the running back is the passer and is protected.

[Dommer1]

Sorry, misunderstood your posting. The guy who gets hit, yes, he is a passer and protected under the RTP rule, just like the previous poster said. Sorry.

[The Roamin' Umpire]

Originally posted by JasonTX
To simplify it, the foul is not "Roughing the QB". The foul is "Rouging the Passer" In your question you stated who passed the ball. The position the player was in makes no difference. The Passer is defined as any player who throws a legal forward pass, in your case the running back is the passer and is protected.

Interesting - the Fed rule book has no requirement that the pass be forward, merely that the pass be thrown from in or behind the neutral zone.

[kdf5]

"Interesting - the Fed rule book has no requirement that the pass be forward, merely that the pass be thrown from in or behind the neutral zone".

But in the definitions (2-30-11) a passer is a player who throws a forward pass.

[SoGARef]

By definition (2-30-11), the passer is the player who throws a forward pass. He is the passer from the time the ball is released until the pass ends, or until he moves to participate in the play.

[Bob Proctor]

The tough thing in this play is determining whether the linebacker had the opportunity to know that the runner had become a passer before he attempts to tackle him. If the linebacker had ample opportunity to see that the runner had become a passer AND also had the time to avoid hitting him after he had released the ball but hit him anyway he is guilty of roughing the passer. Situation: The linebacker has already launched himself at the runner before the pass is thrown. Can you penalize the linebacker because the runner decided to throw the ball when he knew the hit was unavoidable? Referees are faced with the same situation numerous times in each game and have to make the same assessment each time. In most cases when the quarterback is hit the result is not roughing, espcially when he is scrambling or, in other words, has become a runner.

[Forksref]

Originally posted by Bob Proctor
The tough thing in this play is determining whether the linebacker had the opportunity to know that the runner had become a passer before he attempts to tackle him. If the linebacker had ample opportunity to see that the runner had become a passer AND also had the time to avoid hitting him after he had released the ball but hit him anyway he is guilty of roughing the passer. Situation: The linebacker has already launched himself at the runner before the pass is thrown. Can you penalize the linebacker because the runner decided to throw the ball when he knew the hit was unavoidable? Referees are faced with the same situation numerous times in each game and have to make the same assessment each time. In most cases when the quarterback is hit the result is not roughing, espcially when he is scrambling or, in other words, has become a runner.

Bob raises a good point. It is really a judgment call if the B player could tell if the A was a passer prior to "launching" himself. Sometimes the non-QB gives it away because he doesn't run upfield, but 'drifts' to the side. In other cases the non-QB has the ball and looks like he is going to run upfield. In any case, it is a judgment if the hit was late or if it was unavoidable. We all have the image in our minds as to which is which and we call it accordingly.

[schmitty1973]

The way I see it, the penalty is roughing the passer, not hitting the passer. I consider roughing when the passer gets hit well after he throws the ball. Obviously if a RB is the passer, he could still tuck it and run anytime, so the defense has to be given the opportunity to tackle him.