Touchback question

[ChuckElias]

I saw this in an NCAA game on ESPN tonight. Player caught the kick-off just inside his own end zone. He took one step forward, so that his front foot was outside the endzone. The rest of his body was in the endzone, and it looked like the ball was still completely inside the endzone. He then stepped back so both feet were in the endzone and knelt. The officials called a touchback, which seemed reasonable to me, but the announcer (we know how reliable they are on rules questions) said it should've been a safety.

I'm just curious what the basis for the ruling is, the position of the feet or of the ball?

[BoBo]

Not a NCAA expert by any means but my gut says the position of the ball on this play. I say touchback is correct.

I am sure one of the NCAA gurus will be here shortly to correct us.

[SJoldguy]

In the NFHS it is the ball that determines safety or touchback or touchdown. Of course in your play it would be a touchback because it was a kick into the endzone...but in the NFHS you can face the same situation involving an interception. In that case, as you described it, it would be a touchback because the ball has to completely leave the endzone before it is considered to be in the field of play (i.e. out of the endzone)

[Snake~eyes]

Originally posted by BoBo
Not a NCAA expert by any means but my gut says the position of the ball on this play. I say touchback is correct.

I am sure one of the NCAA gurus will be here shortly to correct us.

Ditto. :0

[mcrowder]

Correct call, unless the ball moved ENTIRELY out of the EZ, just like Fed with an Int or Fumble recovery. The foot is immaterial.

Sounds like this announcer spent too much time watching on Sunday.

[Rich]

Originally posted by mcrowder
Correct call, unless the ball moved ENTIRELY out of the EZ, just like Fed with an Int or Fumble recovery. The foot is immaterial.

Sounds like this announcer spent too much time watching on Sunday.

And the SportsCenter talking heads were mocking the officials during last night's show for "not seeing" the OBVIOUS foot out of the endzone. Sheesh.

[jumpmaster]

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

And the SportsCenter talking heads were mocking the officials during last night's show for "not seeing" the OBVIOUS foot out of the endzone. Sheesh.

But given the chance, I would go to work for SportsCenter in a heartbeat.

[chiefgil]

You can drive a bus out of the EZ, but if the ball ain't on the bus, it ain't a safety. It's a TB.

[ChuckElias]

Thanks, everybody.

Originally posted by Jumpmaster
But given the chance, I would go to work for SportsCenter in a heartbeat.

I gotta admit, if the worldwide leader ever decides they want a basketball ref as an analyst for their games, I've got my resume ready.

[trainman52]

Excuse me for my newbe question but here goes; are you saying that a interception in the endzone would be blown dead at that point and called a touchback. Can the R player after intercepting the ball in the endzone take a knee and be granted a touchback?

Thanks,
Stev

[Snake~eyes]

Originally posted by trainman52
Excuse me for my newbe question but here goes; are you saying that a interception in the endzone would be blown dead at that point and called a touchback. Can the R player after intercepting the ball in the endzone take a knee and be granted a touchback?

Thanks,
Stev

No an inteception in the Endzone would not be blown dead, the player can take a knee or run it out. If he takes a knee it is a touchback.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
I saw this in an NCAA game on ESPN tonight. Player caught the kick-off just inside his own end zone. He took one step forward, so that his front foot was outside the endzone. The rest of his body was in the endzone, and it looked like the ball was still completely inside the endzone. He then stepped back so both feet were in the endzone and knelt. The officials called a touchback, which seemed reasonable to me, but the announcer (we know how reliable they are on rules questions) said it should've been a safety.

I'm just curious what the basis for the ruling is, the position of the feet or of the ball?

Not sure about the philosophy of the American game, but I do know that there are officials positioned on the goal line for sitch's where a touchback might be called.

In the Cdn game, everything is about the position of the ball, and nothing relates to the position of the player.

So, should the above happened in our game, with a rule set to govern how to handle the play, it would be a touchback, since the ball never left the endzone.

Also, in our game, the goal line is part of the endzone, so even if only the last inch of the ball is touching the endzone, when the player stepped forward, it is still in the endzone. (This is consistent with just the front tip of the ball requiring to touch/break the plane of the goal line, where it bounds the field of play, to award a TD.)

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
... the worldwide leader ...

You get the CBC?

[chiefgil]

In NFHS, all kicks which go into the EZ are considered a TB as soon as it touches anything in the EZ. Dead ball, out to the 20.

If a ball is itnercepted in the EZ, it is a live ball, and B can run it out.

The TB rules only applies to kicks.

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by chiefgil
In NFHS, all kicks which go into the EZ are considered a TB as soon as it touches anything in the EZ. Dead ball, out to the 20.

If a ball is itnercepted in the EZ, it is a live ball, and B can run it out.

The TB rules only applies to kicks.

REPLY: Just to clarify: In NFHS, a kick which goes into the EZ is considered a TB as soon as it touches anything in the EZ it crosses the plane of B's goal line. It does not need to touch something in B's endzone.