Just saw a play in the William & Mary vs. James Madison game. QB went back to pass. He started his passing motion with his arm moving forward. He then changed his mind to not throw the ball. However as his arm followed the normal arc the ball came out of his hand at about his waist. The ball goes backwards from the QB's location. The defense never touched the QB. WH called this an incomplete pass.

What is the call in NCAA and NF?

NFHS: The only exception to a forward pass having to travel forward is "if the potential passer is contacted" and "his arm was moving forward on contact." It is a backward pass if its initial direction was other than toward the B goal line.

I just saw a reply of that just now. The arm motion was very, very quick. I go with the NCAA call of incomplete pass based on camera angle I saw.

I haven´t seen the situation, but as it was described, it can´t be incompleted pass under NCAA rules, because imcompleted can be only a forward pass (7-3-7-a; "incompleted" backward pass is a fumble) and forward pass is defined by points where ball left passer´s hand and where touched anything (2-19-2a) - not by that, what passer wanted to do (only exception to this is, when passer is tackled by opponent after forward movement of passer´s hand begins; 2-19-2-b)

From the camera angle I saw, the ball hit just in front of his foot THEN rebounded backward.
The pass is therefore forward by definition.

Again, the camera angle this particular video replay was shown with on this play could be misleading.

Under the best of conditions this is a difficult play to call. The R is right there. Best thing he can do is make a strong call either way.

I'll have to disagree with Base.

The forward pass actually starts at the point of forward motion - of the passers hand. Not where the ball leaves his hand. I know this is a small difference. But i actually sounds like this is the situation where it could make a diffence.

To explain further. The point where the forward pass starts i often around the passers shoulder, or just behind. The ball normally is not fully released until some point infront of the passer - often the thigh area.

AlexH, I had to think about your post a little bit. Truth is, that rules say only the second point (where pass ends), but don´t say the first one. I don´t know, why I wrote that:-) Despite that, I still think, that I am right.
There are two articles, where is the first point "discussed." 2-19-2-b can´t be considered, I believe, because it´s about "special" thing - when the QB is tackled. Main goal of 2-19-3-b is not determing of that "first" point, but when ruling illegal pass (due to crossing the neutral zone), it shall be considered "when the ball is released;" not when the forward move of arm starts.
And on example. Two players are running toward opponent´s goal line. They are beyond the NZ and one of them throws a pass, which flies exactly parallel to the goal line. Under "my" ruling, that would a legal play, because it was a backward pass (pass started and ended on the same yard (and foot and inch) line, but under your ruling it would be illegal forward pass, because pass started behind the spot, where the ball was caught - due to the fact, that the passer is running (the swing of his arm started on B-21, but ball was released on B-20).

Yes, I know, this is discussion about nothing and when on the field, nobody knows where exactly (on inches) was the ball thrown, but if someone could contribute and solve the problem, where pass starts, I would sleep better:-))

Nice discussion. :)

The main reason for my interpretation is rule 2-19-2-c. To me it is simply easier (and in my opinion more precise).

If "point of intentional forward movement" = start of pass. Some of the complications of this situation is removed. This way you "only" have to see if - and where - the passers hand moved forward. The "point of release" is more wishy-washy.

However, I only use this interpretation for the situation Warrenkicker described. In situation with a pass parallel to the goal line. In those situations things like intent of the play is a better tool. At least behind the line of scrimmage.

I havn't completely wrapped my brain around a situation with a pass on the run - like a kick return. But I would have to go with "parallel or not". Which I think is what you suggested.

It seems I use the same rule in to different ways. I can only explain this by the diffence between rules 2-19-A and 2-19-B. In A the neutral zone is not mentioned. In B it is mentioned.

That's about the best I can do to explain my thinking. But at least this discussion got me thinking.

Well, 2-19-2-c is a good rule:-))

Canadian Ruling
 

Fumble. 6.4.1, 6.4.7

[Edited by JugglingReferee on Dec 14th, 2004 at 11:02 PM]