The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Aug 07, 2005, 12:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 45
During an attempted onside kick from its 40-yard line, the ball bounces into the air. As the ball is airborne, near R's 49 yard line, K2 jumps and controls the ball at R's 48 yard line. Prior to coming to the ground, K2 is pushed out of bounds where the recovery is completed. In the covering official's opinion, K2 would have landed inbounds.
What's the ruling?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Aug 07, 2005, 02:01pm
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,558
Lightbulb Canadian Ruling

Quote:
Originally posted by gtwbam
During an attempted onside kick from its 40-yard line, the ball bounces into the air. As the ball is airborne, near R's 49 yard line, K2 jumps and controls the ball at R's 48 yard line. Prior to coming to the ground, K2 is pushed out of bounds where the recovery is completed. In the covering official's opinion, K2 would have landed inbounds.
What's the ruling?
In Canada, the kick-off line is the 45 (because we have 110 yard fields). The restraining zone extends to centre-ice, the 55.

Therefore, this is equivalent to K2 while airborne, controlling the ball at the R53. This is a legal recovery by K (greater than 10 yards from point of kick-off). The official's judgment that R's contact pushed K to land OB when K would have landed IB follows the same philosophy as a pass receiver being pushed OB. It is a legal and successful kick recovery, K-1D/10 @ R-48.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Aug 07, 2005, 04:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 1,464
I think we better think about it a little more.

By definition (rule 2) an airborne player has completed a recovery when he first contacts the ground inbounds with the ball in his possession.

This K player did not contact the gound inbounds.

In the definition section for a Catch, very similar words exists but with the addition of the words or contacted by an opponent in such a way that he is prevented from returning to the ground inbounds ... .

Makes me wonder if those words were ommitted from the recovery definition by design or oversite.

I'm going with free kick OOB for now.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Aug 07, 2005, 06:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 463
I agree with Theisey - flag for free kick OOB at the spot where it crosses the sideline.

If the kick is in flight, then 2-4-1 allows a catch when the player is pushed out by an opponent, 6-1-5 gives the ball to K at the spot of the catch.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sun Aug 07, 2005, 06:46pm
MJT MJT is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Alton, Iowa
Posts: 1,796
Quote:
Originally posted by Theisey
I think we better think about it a little more.

By definition (rule 2) an airborne player has completed a recovery when he first contacts the ground inbounds with the ball in his possession.

This K player did not contact the gound inbounds.

In the definition section for a Catch, very similar words exists but with the addition of the words or contacted by an opponent in such a way that he is prevented from returning to the ground inbounds ... .

Makes me wonder if those words were ommitted from the recovery definition by design or oversite.

I'm going with free kick OOB for now.
I agree Theisey, free kick OOB's.

It does not meet the defition of a catch cuz a catch involves "possession of a live ball which is in flight..." we have a grounded kick in this case.

A recovery is "gaining possession of a live ball after it strikes the ground. An airborn player has completed a recovery when eh first contacts the ground inbounds with the ball in his possession."

Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sun Aug 07, 2005, 08:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 63
Kick out of bounds. The ball was recovered not caught.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 08, 2005, 06:39pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Clinton Township, NJ
Posts: 2,065
REPLY: Agree...the player never completed his recovery. The result is a free kick OOB. The contact by an opponent is immaterial.
__________________
Bob M.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 10, 2005, 04:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 6
Quote:
Originally posted by gtwbam
During an attempted onside kick from its 40-yard line, the ball bounces into the air. As the ball is airborne, near R's 49 yard line, K2 jumps and controls the ball at R's 48 yard line. Prior to coming to the ground, K2 is pushed out of bounds where the recovery is completed. In the covering official's opinion, K2 would have landed inbounds.
What's the ruling?
This may be a stupid question, but, has the ball touched the ground? If it hasn't, I'm flagging for kick-catch interference.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 10, 2005, 05:14pm
MJT MJT is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Alton, Iowa
Posts: 1,796
Quote:
Originally posted by nmref
Quote:
Originally posted by gtwbam
During an attempted onside kick from its 40-yard line, the ball bounces into the air. As the ball is airborne, near R's 49 yard line, K2 jumps and controls the ball at R's 48 yard line. Prior to coming to the ground, K2 is pushed out of bounds where the recovery is completed. In the covering official's opinion, K2 would have landed inbounds.
What's the ruling?
This may be a stupid question, but, has the ball touched the ground? If it hasn't, I'm flagging for kick-catch interference.
Ya, he said the ball bounces into the air, so the kicker did one of those driving down into the ground onside kicks which then bounce high.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 10, 2005, 05:17pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 6
Quote:
Originally posted by MJT
Quote:
Originally posted by nmref
Quote:
Originally posted by gtwbam
During an attempted onside kick from its 40-yard line, the ball bounces into the air. As the ball is airborne, near R's 49 yard line, K2 jumps and controls the ball at R's 48 yard line. Prior to coming to the ground, K2 is pushed out of bounds where the recovery is completed. In the covering official's opinion, K2 would have landed inbounds.
What's the ruling?
This may be a stupid question, but, has the ball touched the ground? If it hasn't, I'm flagging for kick-catch interference.
Ya, he said the ball bounces into the air, so the kicker did one of those driving down into the ground onside kicks which then bounce high.
Oh, I see. Thanks MJT.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 11, 2005, 12:36am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,010
OK, so if he gets pushed out at the sideline, it's free kick OOB. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that K1 leaps into the air about 5 yards inbounds from the sideline. R1 catches K1 before he touches the ground and carries him out of bounds. Whaddyagot?
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 11, 2005, 08:17am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 618
Send a message via MSN to grantsrc
Caught and carried= Catch. He would've come down inbounds.

Now, back to the original situation, one thing that is important to keep in mind here is the direction the player is heading and the direction of the push. It the push changes the direction the player was heading, then you have a catch. If the push doesn't change direction, then you have no catch. 7.5.2L
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 11, 2005, 08:18am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 463
Technically the recovery isn't complete until he touches the ground. However, I'm ruling that the ball is dead inbounds because forward progress has been stopped* - K's ball 1/10.

* So what if K may not advance on this play? 4-2-2a makes no reference to that - it kills the play any time forward progress has been stopped.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 11, 2005, 09:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Clinton Township, NJ
Posts: 2,065
REPLY: However...4-2-2a refers to a "runner" which by definition is a player "in possession" of a live ball. "Possession" requires that he is handed the ball or he has "caught" or "recovered" it. "Recovery" requires that he first contact the ground inbounds. There is no 'exception' which allows you to rule a recovery because an opponent's contact stopped his forward progress like there is with a "catch." Therefore, he has not "recovered" the ball; he's not in "possession" of a live ball; he's not a "runner" and 4-2-2a can't apply. I believe that technically you still have a free kick OOB. I don't necessarily like it, but I think that would be the correct ruling.
__________________
Bob M.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 11, 2005, 12:34pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,010
Quote:
Originally posted by grantsrc
Caught and carried= Catch. He would've come down inbounds.

Now, back to the original situation, one thing that is important to keep in mind here is the direction the player is heading and the direction of the push. It the push changes the direction the player was heading, then you have a catch. If the push doesn't change direction, then you have no catch. 7.5.2L
How is "caught and carried" any different from the original sitch. In the original sitch, he woulda come down inbounds as well if he hadn't been hit.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:35pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1