Goal line to infinity??

[ump33]

From the 2014 Case Book ...

2.26.3 SITUATION: Runner A1 is advancing towards B's goal line and is very near the sideline.
a. A1 advances into B's end zone while holding the ball outside the sideline plane; or
b. A1 dives toward the end zone, but is hit by B1 which causes him to land out of bounds beyond the goal-line extended.
A1's last contact with the ground was short of the goal line. In both cases the ball breaks the plane of B's goal-line extended.
RULING:
• In (a), it is a touchdown because A1 was touching inbounds when the ball broke the plane of the goal-line extended.
• In (b) since A1 was not touching inbounds and was short of the goal line when he was hit, it is not a touchdown even though the ball did break the goal-line plane extended. The ball is spotted at the inbounds spot on the yard line where the foremost point of the ball crossed the sideline plane when A1 was driven out of bounds.

Sorry, I missed where this was posted on Page 2 of the thread.

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by ump33

Sorry, I missed where this was posted on Page 2 of the thread.

That's OK: it was 11 years ago.

[Canned Heat]

Originally Posted by ltrain1007

When diving out of bounds its the spot of the ball where you land.

When punting and kicking its where the ball crosses the out of bounds line. But when a player has position, the ball is not out of bounds until the player is, and by rule . . .

"A player or an airborne player is out of bounds when any part of his person touches anything other than another player or game official, on or outside a boundary line."

"When diving out of bounds its the spot of the ball where you land."

Again.....no. It would be placed at the foremost spot where the ball intersected the sideline....he does not get the benefit of another 18-36 inches to where he contacts any out of bounds area or persons OOB. You are essentially confusing goal line extended with ball crossing the sideline. Think of where a punt / fumble crosses the sideline and where or how it is marked.

[HLin NC]

Lock this thread, a first time poster resurrected an 11 year old post.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

Lock this thread, a first time poster resurrected an 11 year old post.

What's the benefit of locking it? It's not a terrifically long thread, so someone interested in the subject can easily read thru it, and if they still have Qs, what better thread to post them in?

[Theisey]

Stupid comment by the Mr. Michael.
Simply put, as long as the player is a runner (i.e not diving toward the pylon) the goal line extended off the field as far as the players arm can reach while his feet/foot is still on the ground.

[mikesears]

Originally posted by ltrain1007
When diving out of bounds its the spot of the ball where you land.

When punting and kicking its where the ball crosses the out of bounds line. But when a player has position, the ball is not out of bounds until the player is, and by rule . . .

"A player or an airborne player is out of bounds when any part of his person touches anything other than another player or game official, on or outside a boundary line."

Rule 4-3-3:

When a runner goes out of bounds, the inbounds spot is fixed by the yard line through the foremost point of the ball at the time the runner crosses the plane of the sideline.

Yes, he's not out of bounds until he touches the ground out of bounds, but the ball still comes back to the spot where the ball was when the ball crossed the sideline plane.

[ltrain1007]

Where are you getting this information from? And are your saying that if im on the 1 yard line and reach outside the pylon its a touchdown? but if i dive its not a touchdown?

Im not calling anyone stupid or anything, im completely rational, but i would like to see facts, so i can interpert them.

Facts the goal line is intenionally considered to be a plane, and by definition a plane is infinite.

THATS FACT, no one can argue that.

My second fact is that a player is not out of bounds until he touches the ground.

THATS FACT, no one can argue that.

and lastly it is a touchdown when a player reaches the ball across the plane.


Since i dont have the rule book, YET, logically that supports my argument.


if anyone has anything that supports their counter argument please enlighten me, thanks.

THATS FACT, no one can argue that.

[ltrain1007]

----------------------------------------------------------
Yes, he's not out of bounds until he touches the ground out of bounds, but the ball still comes back to the spot where the ball was when the ball crossed the sideline plane.
----------------------------------------------------------

Ok thanks for the fact, i remember that being the case now that i think of it.

So i guess that means that its not a touchdown when you dive because although u cross the plane, u land out of bounds which nullifies the progress made back to where u went out of bounds.

but it is still a touchdown if you cannot get the ball INSIDE the pylon? As long as your feet are in play?

[mikesears]

Originally posted by ltrain1007
Where are you getting this information from? And are your saying that if im on the 1 yard line and reach outside the pylon its a touchdown? but if i dive its not a touchdown?

Im not calling anyone stupid or anything, im completely rational, but i would like to see facts, so i can interpert them.

Facts the goal line is intenionally considered to be a plane, and by definition a plane is infinite.

THATS FACT, no one can argue that.

My second fact is that a player is not out of bounds until he touches the ground.

THATS FACT, no one can argue that.

and lastly it is a touchdown when a player reaches the ball across the plane.


Since i dont have the rule book, YET, logically that supports my argument.


if anyone has anything that supports their counter argument please enlighten me, thanks.

THATS FACT, no one can argue that.

The Rules support what I have said. But to add, so does the casebook.

See NF casebook play 2.25.3

Here it is from the NF website:

Runner A1 is advancing towards B’s goal line and is very near the sideline. (a) A1 advances into B’s end zone while holding the ball outside the sideline plane; or (b) A1 dives toward the end zone, but is hit by B1 which causes him to land out of bounds beyond the goal-line extended. A1’s last contact with the ground was short of the goal line. In both cases the ball breaks the plane of B’s goal-line extendended.

RULING

In (a), it is a touchdown because A1 was touching inbounds when the ball broke the plane of the goal-line extended. However, in (b) since A1 was not touching inbounds and was short of the goal line when he was hit, it is not a touchdown even though the ball did break the goal-line plane extended. The ball is spotted at the inbounds spot on the yard line where the foremost point of the ball crossed the sideline plane when A1 was driven out of bounds.

[ABoselli]

The goal line extends for those who are still touching inbounds. It does not for those that are not.

If you have the ball inside the pylon, you don't need the extension, so that's a touchdown. If you want the extension, you better be touching inbounds.

It's that simple.

[ltrain1007]

Thanks for the clarification, and for the case, that really helped.

[mcrowder]

ltrain - why so belligerent? You say you don't have the rulebook. We all posted the rules from the book. Since you don't have the book, why try to logic yourself around what the rules SHOULD be, in your fantasy world. Get the book and read it. This rule is really VERY easy to understand, once you read it.

[ltrain1007]

Mcrowder,

I am in no way Belligerent. If i come across that way, im apologize. I just wanted some real facts not just someone saying NO, without anything behind it, thats why i appreciate mike spears efforts.

I found this article from nfl ref Jerry Markbreit that says that someone diving outside the pylon and landing out of bounds is still a TD long as some part of their body crossese the endzone.

I understand that one can not just dive 45 degrees out of bounds and score, but do you guys agree with this statement form Jerry Markbreit ?



from ChicagoSports.com (Chicago Tribune Online)
Dear Jerry, I have an incredibly confusing NFL rules question that I earnestly ask you to answer for me. It concerns the "infinite goal line." In the Eagles/Dolphins game, Correll Buckhalter scored a 2-yard TD in the 4th quarter that was challenged by Miami. The play featured Buckhalter leaving his feet at the 1-yard line, diving clear into the air, and landing out of bounds. Apparently the ball crossed the goal line even though Buckhalter landed out of bounds. While I understand that to be a touchdown, John Madden said, "it doesn't matter if the ball crossed the goal line inside the pylon because the goal line extends out beyond the pylons." Al Michaels said the NFL rules committee refers to the goal line "extending around the world," even though pylons are present. Can someone PLEASE explain to me if the goal line does in fact extend into infinity, AND more importantly, please explain why it does? If so, can you score a touchdown by leaping out of bounds at the 1-yard line, cross the "infinite" goal line, and then land totally out of bounds without having to extend the ball inside the pylon? --Brian Mariani, Clinton, Mass.

John Madden was correct when he stated that the ball does not have to cross the goal line inside or over the pylon for a touchdown to be scored. To put it very simply: Whenever the ball carrier dives for the end zone and any part of his body passes over the pylon before he touches anything out-of-bounds, it is a touchdown, regardless of where the ball is. If the runner goes out-of-bounds short of the pylon and the ball passes over the pylon before the runner lands out-of-bounds, it is also a touchdown. The goal line plane actually extends beyond the sideline and theoretically "extends around the world." In my opinion, this rule exists to make the game more exciting and more interesting in goal line situations. -- Jerry Markbreit - NFL Referee

[ltrain1007]

I just reread this thread to see why i am considered belligerent... my whole rant on where are u getting ur facts from was submitted b4 reading mike sears previous comments, sorry.