NFL Rules and Pylon

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

Thanks TXMike! That sounds pretty clear that the pylon is always in bounds in the NFL and this crew got it right (as expected).

The pylon is not "in bounds" The pylon, in NFL rules, is treated as if it doesn't exist.

[Stripe]

I'm with cougar. I've always been told the same thing. It would be a touchdown because he broke the plane of the goal line.

[AndrewMcCarthy]

Originally Posted by Suudy

Is this an NFL'ism? As I understand it in NFHS, the GL extended only applies if a player is on his feet. If a player leaves his feet and hits the pylon, it is not a touchdown.

You need to read the rest of my post. If he hits the pylon with the ball, I'm going up with it. I'm not going to try to sell that he hit the "wrong" side of the pylon.

[NickelDeuce]

Think of it this way. As long at the receiver touches the pylon while he is airborn it's like he hasn't touched it at all simply because he is in the air. What if the pylon was not there and he jumps up, catches the ball and lands inbounds. TD.

If he hits the pylon going up or coming down, he still has to get both feet inbounds. It makes sense to me.

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by AndrewMcCarthy

You need to read the rest of my post. If he hits the pylon with the ball, I'm going up with it. I'm not going to try to sell that he hit the "wrong" side of the pylon.

I understand that the center of discussion is about the NFL side of things. I'm trying to confirm my understanding of NFHS.

The entire pylon is out of bounds. Regardless of what side of the pylong the player hits, if he is off his feet, I'd rule out of bounds at the 1 foot line, or wherever is about where the ball crossed the sidelines.

Of course if he is on his feet (in bounds of course), then we have a TD because the ball crossed the GL extended.

[OverAndBack]

Originally Posted by Suudy

The entire pylon is out of bounds. Regardless of what side of the pylong the player hits, if he is off his feet, I'd rule out of bounds at the 1 foot line, or wherever is about where the ball crossed the sidelines.

Of course if he is on his feet (in bounds of course), then we have a TD because the ball crossed the GL extended.

Is that correct? 'Cause that'll make my life a whole lot simpler if that's really the deal right there.

[Warrenkicker]

Originally Posted by Suudy

The entire pylon is out of bounds. Regardless of what side of the pylong the player hits, if he is off his feet, I'd rule out of bounds at the 1 foot line, or wherever is about where the ball crossed the sidelines.

Be careful with that thought.

PYLONS
1.2.4 SITUATION: Ball carrier A10 dives into the pylon at the intersection of the goal line and sidelines. RULING: Touchdown. Assuming the pylon was placed properly, the ball broke the plane of the goal line prior to the touching of the pylon.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Suudy

I understand that the center of discussion is about the NFL side of things. I'm trying to confirm my understanding of NFHS.

The entire pylon is out of bounds. Regardless of what side of the pylong the player hits, if he is off his feet, I'd rule out of bounds at the 1 foot line, or wherever is about where the ball crossed the sidelines.

Of course if he is on his feet (in bounds of course), then we have a TD because the ball crossed the GL extended.

Sorry, OAB, he is not entirely correct. Or, at least, while it's correct, it's misleading. The last sentence is 100% correct. However...

Yes, the INSIDE part of the pylon and the BACK of the pylon are out of bounds. But if the ball hits the inside part of the pylon first, then by definition it crossed the goal line prior to hitting it. You say you'd rule this out of bounds at the 1 foot line ... or wherever the ball crossed the sideline - if the ball first hits the INSIDE of the pylon, then it crossed the sideline AT the pylon, and in the endzone.

And if it hit the back, I suppose it depends on what happened prior to that - did it cross the goal line or the out of bounds line first?

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Sorry, OAB, he is not entirely correct. Or, at least, while it's correct, it's misleading. The last sentence is 100% correct. However...

Yes, the INSIDE part of the pylon and the BACK of the pylon are out of bounds. But if the ball hits the inside part of the pylon first, then by definition it crossed the goal line prior to hitting it. You say you'd rule this out of bounds at the 1 foot line ... or wherever the ball crossed the sideline - if the ball first hits the INSIDE of the pylon, then it crossed the sideline AT the pylon, and in the endzone.

And if it hit the back, I suppose it depends on what happened prior to that - did it cross the goal line or the out of bounds line first?

My confusion on a dive for the GL is that the ball must break the plane of the GL on the field of play, and with the pylon being outside the field of play. The GL extended only applies when the runner is on his feet.

Great post! That's the exact clarification I was looking for. Now I understand why AndrewMcCarthy referred to the inside of the pylon. Your explanation put a whole new light on the subject, and I stand corrected.

[OverAndBack]