Catch/No catch?

[seeleather]

I was hoping to find someone who recalls a particular play in a bowl game about 3-4 years ago that was featured in Ref Mag. John Bible was the R and the play unfolded as follows (IIRC

QB rolls out toward sideline and comes under quick, heavy pressure. Just before he is hit, he passes the ball approx 20 yards downfield right along the sideline. One of the defensive backs leaps into the air and grabs the apparent interception as his momentum has him floating over the sideline on his way OOB. In an amazing display of athletic ability, all the while airborne and before he lands OOB, he secures the pick then turns his body and laterals the ball back to a teammate in the field of play. His teammate catches the ball and advances a short distance before he is downed. Again, my memory on this is sketchy, but I believe the R called the crew together for an exceptionally long huddle to discuss. In fact, I believe he even went to the HC of both teams (Wake Forest and North Carolina) and flat out told them he needed time to figure it out (both coaches were apparently very understanding as they had never seen such a play either and just told the R to call it the best he could and they would live with it.) Does anyone recall this play/article? What was the final word on this? Thanks in advance....

[TXMike]

It was the 2001 Peach Bowl (NC-Auburn).

From a news story about the game:
The Tar Heels were driving on their next possession when Auburn defensive back Karlos Dansby made a controversial interception along the right sideline. Dansby caught the ball while he was in the air, then threw it forward to teammate Dontarrius Thomas, who caught it.
The officials ruled Dansby had possession even though his feet never touched the ground inbounds before he tossed the ball. Auburn was flagged for an illegal forward pass and penalized five yards, so the Tigers began the drive on their 38.

_________________
MY NOTE: This very play had been discussed on the McGriff's board several times in 2000 and 2001 and the consensus was that it would be a legal bat of a forward pass "if anything this wild ever really happened."

[Theisey]

This play was also one of many put on the following year's NCAA training video with the commentary as a legal play.

[RoyGardner]

Couple of items for discussion:

1. If player had the ball in his "possession and control" enough to make a "forward pass" (IMO a "football move") why should that not be ruled an illegal forward pass? (Certainly the enforcement spot would be a bit problematical.)

2. If player did not have the ball in his "possession and control" enough to make a "forward pass", therefore rule that play is a "bat" - not a pass, why should that not be ruled illegal batting (a forward bat)?

3. If the "pass" or "bat" is not forward, and the loose ball is caught by another B player, then we have a legal heads-up play.

[Theisey]

Originally Posted by RoyGardner

Couple of items for discussion:
..
3. If the "pass" or "bat" is not forward, and the loose ball is caught by another B player, then we have a legal heads-up play.

if you had taken 20 seconds to check the rule on batting, you would have found that a pass in flight can be batted in any direction by any player eligible to touch the ball, and that means forward or backward.
All players on team-B are eligible to touch the ball.

[The Roamin' Umpire]

Originally Posted by RoyGardner

Couple of items for discussion:

1. If player had the ball in his "possession and control" enough to make a "forward pass" (IMO a "football move") why should that not be ruled an illegal forward pass? (Certainly the enforcement spot would be a bit problematical.)

2. If player did not have the ball in his "possession and control" enough to make a "forward pass", therefore rule that play is a "bat" - not a pass, why should that not be ruled illegal batting (a forward bat)?

3. If the "pass" or "bat" is not forward, and the loose ball is caught by another B player, then we have a legal heads-up play.

Looking at the NCAA rules, two sentences stick out: 2-19-1 "Passing the ball is throwing it." 2-10-3 "Batting the ball is intentionally striking it or intentionally changing its direction with the hands or arms."

It seems to me that the officials, without further clarification, had a judgement to make. They judged that the receiver had thrown the ball, as opposed to merely changing its direction, and so called the IFP. If they had judged that the receiver had only changed the direction, as opposed to throwing it, then a "no call" would have been correct, since the rules allow a forward pass to be batted by any eligible player in any direction. (9-4-1a) The NCAA has since removed this judgement by putting their comment on the training video that theisey mentioned - it's to be considered a bat, not a pass.

-----------------------------------

Under NFHS rules, this is also legal, though the reasoning is a bit different. The definition of passing (2-30-1) requires the ball to be in player possession. The definition of player possession (2-33-1) requires that the player be handed or snapped the ball, or that he recovers or catches it. The first three don't apply here, and the definition of catch (2-4-1) requires touching the ground. So - there's no catch, thus no possession, no pass, and no IFP.

The definition of batting (2-2) requires striking or slapping the ball. The receiver doesn't do that. (And if he did, it wouldn't be illegal - 9-7-3 permits batting of forward passes. (I'd manage to forget that - glad I just looked it up.)) All that's left is 2-26: "A muff is the touching or accidental kicking of a loose ball by a player in an unsuccessful attempt to secure possession."

In short, nice play, kid.

[VaHoops]

For NCAA, another thing to consider is that by definition, the ball being held (and subsequently thrown) by the "intercepting" DB is still a loose ball...

2-2-3-a
"A loose ball is a ball not in player possession during: 3. The interval after a legal forward pass is touched and before it becomes complete, incomplete or intercepted."

and

2-2-5-a
"A player 'gains posession' when he is firmly holding or controlling the ball while contacting the ground inbounds."

Until he returns to the ground, the ball is still loose, possession has not been established and a catch has not been completed. 2-19-1 tells us that "a pass continues to be a pass until it is caught or intercepted by a player or the ball becomes dead," so as strange as it may sound a ball firmly in the hands of an airborne player is still a pass (and it retains that status if he "throws" it).

[MG_]

Check CCA #46 for a similar play:

A 4/Goal @ B's 18. The score is A14-B20. The QB throws a legal forward pass to airborne tight end who receives the ball on B's 8 and, while still airborne, deliberately bats the ball forward toward B's goal line. The eligible slot back catches the ball on B's 3 and crosses B's goal line with the ball. Cancel Score or TD?

* (a) Touchdown
* (b) Cancel Score

Originally Posted by Rom Gilbert

RULING: Touchdown. A try B3. The tight end did not catch the ball since he did not return to the ground. The tight end legally batted a legal forward pass in flight. The play is legal.

@Theisey: to be more precise: forward pass can be batted in any direction. backward pass cannot be batted forward

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by MG_

@Theisey: to be more precise: forward pass can be batted in any direction. backward pass cannot be batted forward

Actually....a backward pass that has not yet hit the ground CAN be batted forward by the non-passing team and could even be batted forward by the passing team if you deem their batting was NOT an attempt to gain yardage. (Kinda silly to permit a forward pass to be batted forward to gain yardgae but not a backward pass)

[Bob M.]

REPLY: MG...I believe that Theisey's comment was meant to convey that the bat itself could be forward or backward--not the pass. The play cited was clearly about a forward pass only. However, your statement is true that a backward pass cannot be batted forward by the passing team in an attempt to gain yardage.

[MG_]

I can't think of a situation where a member of the passing could claim his batting of a backward pass forward was NOT intended to gain yardage.

Unless he was a wooden puppet.

@Bob M.: Theisey wrote "a pass in flight". "A forward pass in flight" would be less ambiguous, just my $0.02.

[TXMike]

You obviously have not reffed in West Texas MG. He could have had every intention to bat the backward pass even further backwards but the wind took it forward where someone got it or it hit the ground.

[Theisey]

I really am a stickler for rule quotes and yes, there is an exception to rule 9-4-1. Your point is valid and I can see how it could confuse or cause someone to comment further.

It was not my intention to ignore that exception, it was just that in this play we were only talking about a particular pass that was a forward pass.
... and yes I was talking about batting of this particular forward pass in any direction that's why I added it means batting it forward or backward.

I'll be a little more careful next time should I come across a too general of a statement.

I think most of us are on the same page. It's just that most of us may not know that the accepted interpertation of this action described in a recent AR as "propels" has actually been around for a long time. I can recall talking about it during our NCAA rules review/test review as far back as 1997 and again in 2000 and most certainly again in 2001. It's was not new then nor was a rule really a changed. At least now the interpertation is well known, so don't screw it up when it happens in your game. I'll not.

[MG_]

@TXMike: That made me think of an interesting situation. Let's assume a ball-carrier downfield attempts to "lateral" to his team mate. The backward pass is blown forward by the wind and hits the ground. By rule that's an illegal forward pass, right? Would you blow the play dead and penalize 5 yards for the wind blow?

[TXMike]

Forward is forward and backward is backward. In your scenario it is an incomplete illegal forward pass and is dead with a flag down also. In mine, it is NOT an illegal bat by Team A. I am consistent.