In the Hula Bowl there was in illegal forward pass on a 99 yard return for a TD of a fumble. Seeing it live, I thought it was a backwards pass, but the replay showed the crew got it right.

The reason this could be such a difficult call is the momentum of the player running at about 18 mph downfield. Here is what I mean. The runner is burning down the field, at 18 mph, and releases the ball at exactly the B-30, “with the initial direction parallel or toward the runners endline.” The problem is he does not release the ball with much force, so by the time his teammate fields the ball, he is at the B-25. The forward momentum the ball had when being carried by the runner moved the ball 5 more yards downfield, even though the initial direction was backwards. So you cannot go by the point of the release of the ball and the point of the catch, because you would rule “forward” when it was “backwards.” Now you see it is backwards, so have no flag down, but it is not going to be that easy to convince the coach of this “momentum of the ball” reasoning of how he released it backwards but the ball ended up 5 yards further downfield.

Your thoughts!?

First, the Hula Bowl uses NCAA rules which unlike NFHS rules depend not upon the initial direction of the pass but the yard line where the pass is received relative to the point of release -- they just have enough officials to be able to properly cover it, some NFHS contests still use three.

While I did not see the play from your description it sounds like a breakaway that was covered by a single official who may have not been in position to conclusively rule, therefore, no flag.

Actually, the R was in front of the play, and the wing man was trailing the play, as obviously the defender was much faster than him, but he made the call, not the R. As far as the NCAA ruling on where caught compared to where released, they definitely got the call correct. The wing man did a great job, cuz where the R was it would be almost impossible for him to rule on it.

This is definitely an easier call in NCAA, where is is where he touched it compared to where he released it. I should have stated the "problem" I discussed is an NF one, not NCAA. That would be a nice change for NF.

I have to agree. Calling the backwards pass with NFHS rules is difficult because you have to be in position to see the arm and the body at the time of release. Conversely, the NCAA/NFL rule requires knowing where the pass initiated and ended. Prevailing thought is a number of NFHS games have just four officials and in lower levels three. To be able to make the call with confidence you need to have an official covering the sideline and with less than five officials that is not always possible.

Seems to me that even in NFHS, this is a forward pass. If there was huge wind or something, a ball initially released backward could be blown forward - and on such a ball, the ruling may be different between FED and NCAA because of the way the NCAA rule is written.

However, assuming no ridiculous wind, if the player released the ball at one point, and it was caught at another point forward from there, it was "thrown" forward --- EVEN if it was thrown forward at a lower speed than the player.

Think of it this way - when the ball left his hand, was it going forward or backward in relation to the FIELD (not the player). This one was going FORWARD. The definition of a forward pass is the direction IT (the BALL) was going when it left the player's hand - not the INTENT of the player or the direction the ball was going in relation to a moving player.

Or - think of it another way. If I'm on an airplane travelling north at 600 mph, and I throw a ball south on the plane at 50 mph, then to everyone on the plane (and myself), it appears I threw the ball south. However, in relation to the ground, the ball was NEVER moving south, even at the instant it left my hand.

Because the ball was going forward when it was released, this is a FORWARD pass (and an illegal one in this case).

I understand, but in NF, it simply states "initial direction parallel or towards the runners endline," not mentioning if the ball ends up forward or not. The thing is, initial direction does not take into account if the player with the ball is moving or not, just the initial direction, and that would be when he released it, not where it ends up. Whether he is standing still, running at 18 mph, or flying at 600 mph, initial direction is initial direction, and has nothing to do with relative motion. That was my intent with the question. It is covered in NCAA, but not in NF, and that is why the play I described would be legal in NF, but not in NCAA.
The rediculous wind is the momentum of the player with the ball.

You almost made my point for me until that last sentence.

If the ball went forward from the player, then according to every law of physics, the ball was going forward when it left the player's hands. The 18-mile an hour wind that was the player let go of a ball - that ball (minus the "small force" mentioned in the initial post) was, therefore, going forward at 18 mph. THIS WAS A FORWARD PASS. The "initial direction" was "toward the player's endline".

The only reason I mention wind is that it IS different from the player. If the player released the ball backward initially, and an outside force (i.e. a strong wind) caused the ball to blow forward, it sounds like FED has a backward pass, while NCAA has a forward pass.

But the player's momentum is, as you say, irrelevant - and not sufficient evidence to call this a backward pass. I say again. THIS WAS A FORWARD PASS.

The (or at least a) physics teacher on board agrees with mcrowder - if the ball is NEVER moving towards or parallel to the player's own end line, it must be a forward pass.

I disagree. It is considered a backwards pass even if the ball ends up beyond where he released it IF he pushes it backwards, regardless if the ball actually traveled forward. I teach Science and understand what you are saying about the relative motion of the ball, but that is not how it is worded in the rule. I totally understand your jet plane discussion and use it in class in fact, but that does not matter cuz it is the "initial direction", not "initial motion" of the ball. I think the "initial direction", not "initial motion" is the key wording here. What do you think of my reply.

Ask yourself, in relation to the field, what is the "initial direction" of the ball? Upfield. Forward pass.

The entire purpose of this rule, by the way, is so that external forces do not turn a backward pass into a forward pass, or vice versa.

There is no external force on this play at all.

REPLY: Since we're talking physics, I thought I might chime in.

A pass thrown on a football field has three orthogonal (perpendicular) component vectors: One (call it X) is parallel to the surface of the field and to the sideline plane, in other words straight up and down the field; another (call it Y) parallel to the surface of the field but perpedicular to the sideline plane, in other words back and forth across the field; and a third (call it Z) perdendicular to the surface of the field, in other words straight up. Likewise, a runner moving on a football field moves in a manner that can be resolved into two component orthogonals--like X and Y above. For simplicity, we can ignore the insignificant Z component of a player's movement since he's incapable of flight! The velocities (directed vectors) of the runner in motion and the ball can be resolved into their component parts, each with it's own magnitude (speed, in this case).

The problem being analyzed is a simple matter of vector arithmetic. And the only consideration needed to rule properly for NCAA is the arithmetic sum of the X components of the ball in flight and runner's motion. For simplicity's (yeah, right!) sake, let's orient ourselves so that downfield is positive and upfield is negative. Also, let's call the upfield-downfield component of the runner Xr and call the same component of the pass in flight Xp. If Xp + Xr > 0, the ball will land downfield from the point of origin (the point where the pass was released) and the result will be an illegal forward pass.

For Federation, since the only requirement is that the initial direction of the pass not be forward, all we are concerned with is the initial velocity of the ball in the X direction, i.e. Xp. As long as Xp <= 0, then the pass is legal. The velocity of the player in the X direction is not material to the Fed's requirements.

Now all of this ignores any possible wind that might be present. If there is a wind present, it's orthogonal components must also be resolved and consolidated into the resultant velocity. And again, the only component we're interested in is the X component of the wind, Xw. Therefore, in order to have a legal forward pass in NCAA when there's a wind blowing, the mathematical requirement would be that Xp + Xr + Xw <= 0. And the effect of the wind in Federation is not a concern since the only requirement for a legal forward pass in Federation is Xp <=0.

MJT...am I right? <a href='http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb008_ZSzeb02822' target='_blank'><img src='http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/3/3_3_1v.gif' alt='Teacher' border=0></a>

My extent of physics is a few courses/labs in college, so while I understand the vector discussion, I am by no means an expert.

If the "initial motion" of the ball was toward an opponents endline, I would think its "initial direction" was toward that same endline. At the moment the ball leaves the player's hand(s), it is travelling in a certain direction. If there is no wind (or any other outside force), the ball cannot change the direction of travel.

If the runner is running downfield at 18 mph, parallel to the sideline (and 18 mph is a figure I got from the initial post), and he throws the ball with a velocity of 5 mph parallel to the sideline toward his own goalline, then the ball still has a velocity of 13 mph downfield, relative to the ground (in the X direction, as defined in a previous post). Again assuming no outside forces, that ball has a relative velocity of 13 mph when it leaves his hand and relative velocity of 13 mph when it reaches the hands of a receiver.

Based on this, it would be a foward pass. I believe this came up in the AFC Championship Game a few years ago when NE beat Pittsburgh the first time after a blocked FG by NE. NE returned it for a TD, but there was a question of whether a pass after the ball's recovery was forward or backward. It was ruled backward on the field and replays did not show enough evidence to overturn it.

I understand, and agree! It is totally different in NCAA and NF. In NF, there is only ONE factor to consider, initial direction, while in NCAA it is simply based on the end result.

Physics Rule
 

If the player releases the ball, backwards, while moving forward at 18mph, it is going backwards and will land (absent a wind) at a location behind where it was thrown. There is no exception to this, as the creation of momentum is impossible (in our universe, if we starting playing football in other universes all bets are off).
Earlier someone said that if it goes backwards at 5mph, the net is a forward of 13mph. Nope. If it is going backwards at 5mph, then it is going backwards at 5mph. You are mistaking the application of force with the velocity I think. The velocity (and direction thereof) is the only thing that matters, the relative application of force (a little forward, a little backward) does not matter, only the net result of velocity.
Did Bill Nye Science guy ever tackle this topic?

REPLY: Even though I meant my little "treatise" to be tongue-in-cheek, you are making my point exactly. In Federation, you're concerned with the direction of <u>force</u> of the pass, independent of the player's movement. In NCAA, because of their rule, the resultant sum of the player's movement, the initial velocity of the pass, as well as the velocity of the ambient wind will determine whether the pass moves ahead of (illegal) or behind (legal) the point of release.