Interception out-of-bounds tossed to another player in-bounds

[mrcrumley]

In the 2001 Peach Bowl, the Offence threw a pass that was caught by Defender A mid-air and going out-of-bounds. Before he touched down, Defender A tossed the ball to Defender B, who was in-bounds and 4 yards up-field. The ball was awarded to the Defense, but the Defense was also charged with an illegal forward pass penalty.

I disagree with the call. I believe that since Defender A failed to come down with the ball, possession hadn’t yet changed. Therefore, there could be no illegal forward pass. Technically, wouldn’t tossing the ball, in this case, be a tipped ball instead of a pass? I think the correct call would have been to award the Defense with possession at the point that Defender B was tackled, and to have no penalty charged. I suspect that there wasn’t (and still might not be) a rule governing this specific and strange play in the rulebook. Can anyone shed some light on this situation?

You can view the play by going to the following URL:

http://espn.go.com/media/2001/m12/ncf_011231aub1v.avi

[mcrowder]

I agree, although I admit I was not around in 2001 and don't know if the rule changed. But as the rules have been since 02, you're right - no possession until you land, so couldn't be a forward pass. And the rules DO support that interp.

[mikesears]

Originally posted by mrcrumley
In the 2001 Peach Bowl, the Offence threw a pass that was caught by Defender A mid-air and going out-of-bounds. Before he touched down, Defender A tossed the ball to Defender B, who was in-bounds and 4 yards up-field. The ball was awarded to the Defense, but the Defense was also charged with an illegal forward pass penalty.

I disagree with the call. I believe that since Defender A failed to come down with the ball, possession hadn’t yet changed. Therefore, there could be no illegal forward pass. Technically, wouldn’t tossing the ball, in this case, be a tipped ball instead of a pass? I think the correct call would have been to award the Defense with possession at the point that Defender B was tackled, and to have no penalty charged. I suspect that there wasn’t (and still might not be) a rule governing this specific and strange play in the rulebook. Can anyone shed some light on this situation?

You can view the play by going to the following URL:

http://espn.go.com/media/2001/m12/ncf_011231aub1v.avi

This play comes up every year. It is too bad that the search function has been disabled on the site.

[Theisey]

The flag on the play was incorrect. A rule clarification was made for the following year despite some saying it was actually a rule change.
It was not a rule change at all.
The CCA test for 1999 or 2000 had a nearly identical play and I know it caused quite a bit of discussion up my way. The ruling was clear back then. It is not an illegal pass for an airborne receiver to throw or bat the ball forward to another player.

Ever since that TV play, the play comes up and the results are still the same for NF and NCAA. It is a legal pass.

[Snake~eyes]

Originally posted by mikesears

This play comes up every year. It is too bad that the search function has been disabled on the site.

If you didn't know, you can use google! http://www.google.com just go to advanced search and it allows you to search just this website.

[TBone6]

I disagree with your call. I think it was a great call and this is why. In order for the ball to be thrown back in play there has to have been possession of some sort, correct. A tipped ball is ACCIDENTAL and the fact that this player had the know how and ablity to make this play, just shows you that this was not an Accident. Illegal Forward Pass and taken from that spot.

Tim Adams
Colorado Springs, Umpire for Ray Lutz..



[Edited by TBone6 on Oct 22nd, 2004 at 04:57 PM]

[mcrowder]

Unfortunately, Tim, that's not correct by the rules. It's not possible to pass the ball if you don't have possession of it. It's impossible to have possession of it if you have not come down with it. True in both NCAA and FED.

[TBone6]

Okay. Lets take a closer look at this play and Im the first one to admitt if I'm wrong, ask my ex wife. This player looks like he has possesion of the ball.Correct. So you are telling me that if a wide reciever catches the ball out of bounce and throw it back to another reciever coming from behind him that this is a legal play? Okay, remember this game is not all rules, its common sense and knowing what is on purpose and what is not. This was clearly on purpose. Thanks for the correct information on this matter. I learn something new everyday in the wonderful sport..

[Edited by TBone6 on Oct 22nd, 2004 at 05:22 PM]

[mcrowder]

Look up your definition of catch. Until he comes down, he's not caught anything. Intent may be there, but in this case is not against the rules.

Also - when this happened, they admitted afterward that the penalty was not correct.

[TBone6]

Great Job on this. Thanks for the help.. I have to leave now for a game. Great Job, bro.. Look forward to many more situations like this one.

Good luck with your game tonight and remember to have fun and show the player's that you do care about them and this sport. Compliment them every chance you get on a great play.

TBone

[mikesears]

Originally posted by Snake~eyes

If you didn't know, you can use google! http://www.google.com just go to advanced search and it allows you to search just this website.

Too much work

I didn't even think about doing a search that way. Thanks for the suggestion.

It seems the defender never really made a full catch with his hands. Even still, by rule, he didn't have possession and therefore the play should be legal. I should copy this one onto a CD for our rules meeting reviews. Thanks.

[kdf5]

Let's change this play slightly. Say A steps out of bounds, leaps, while airborn over out of bounds territory, he bats the ball to A2. Now what do you have?

[BulldogMcC]

Still legal unless it is a backward pass he bats forward. (We already determined the 'throw' without possession is just a bat)

[Snake~eyes]

Originally posted by BulldogMcC
Still legal unless it is a backward pass he bats forward. (We already determined the 'throw' without possession is just a bat)

You don't have illegal participation?