REPLY: A big goof on this one...I meant to say that it was a <b>UCLA (offensive)</b> player holding the ball in the back of the end zone -- not a USC player!

Ring it up for 6? You don't have to see the recovery. 6 pts. to the offense.

Edit:
On the other hand maybe you do have to see the recovery. Same thing applies to a catch. 2-2-7-e. When in question, the catch, RECOVERY, or interception is not completed. For all we know he may have touched the end line when he picked up the ball. With all the possibilities I would say there is question to his recovery. IF that is correct then where is the ball next put in play. I still think in an actual game situation my natural reaction would be the signal touchdown. So what is the correct answer?

[Edited by JasonTX on Jan 6th, 2005 at 09:42 AM]

I think that rule implies that if you don't SEE possession on a recovery, you don't HAVE possession. However, in this case, you clearly see possession. You have to go with the TD here if no official saw anything to indicate a different call is necessary.

That's why I would most likely ring up 6 on this one. I was just trying to find the "twist" that Bob M. may be getting ready to inform us on. Seems like a pretty cut and dry TD but surely Bob M wouldn't give us a simple TD play like this.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JasonTX

Quote:

(snip)...but surely Bob M wouldn't give us a simple TD play like this.

REPLY: No...actually I would!

Here’s what actually happened: Once the U (Walt Wolfe) could find no ball at the bottom of the pile and they discovered Allen in the back of the endzone, referee Bill Richardson called all seven officials together. They had a player in the back of the endzone with the ball. Richardson wanted to know, “How did he get it?” No one knew. At that point he stepped into the field and signaled TD for UCLA. He announced over the mike, “After searching for the ball, an offensive player was discovered to have it in the end zone. By rule, we have a touchdown.”

The big question is how could such a thing happen and what could we do to prevent it. I think Mike Sears sort of hit the nail on the head. In such cases, there’s no need for <u>all</u> officials to attack the pile. If the deep officials in this game (B, F, and S) had stayed back they probably would have seen the ball come out of the pile in Allen’s possession. Additionally, they could have been watching for any ‘extracurricular’ activity that might occur. Let one (or two at most) officials dig, another stand above the pile to either give the next down or first down signal. The diggers tell the standing official who has the ball and he signals appropriately.