NFL Rules and Pylon
 

I am watching the Bengals-Buccaneers game and Houshmandzadeh made an unbelievable catch at the goal line for a touchdown. Tampa challenged and when I saw the replay I thought it would ruled incomplete. He went up with both feet in bounds and came down with both feet in bounds but his feet hit the pylon on the way down. I thought the pylon was out of bounds and thus this would be an incomplete pass.

After reviewing the play the referee acknowledged the receiver hit the pylon but since the pylon is in-bounds the catch was good. This would be an incomplete pass per NFHS rules correct? Is the NFL rule different?

I saw the same play and immediatly thought the same thing. According to the Fed, the pylon if properly placed is out of bounds. Rule 2.28.1 says "a player...is out of bounds when any part of the person is touching anything...who is on or outside the sideline or endline". So looks like in HS it would be out of bounds and incomplete, unless there's some random exception somewhere that I don't remmeber.

What an amazing set of plays in the NFL today (and I'm only casually watching off and on)!!

I flipped over to Fox and caught the end of the Seahawks-Rams game. Seattle ran a play with about 18 seconds left and had to hurry to reset and spike the ball. There was a flag at the snap and the Rams HC immediately thought it was a procedure foul that would run 10 seconds off the clock and end the game (4 seconds showed on the clock). The penalty was a formation penalty (receiver was not on the line) which does not have a 10 second run-off. They moved the ball back 5 yards and Seattle had to kick a 54-yarder to win it. He made it easily. Talk about a swing in emotions!!

I then flipped back over to CBS and saw the replay of the previous play. TB is down 13-7 and they threw a pass over the middle. The receiver appeared to catch it at the 3 and stretch into the end zone where the ball came out of his hands. The ruling on the field was an incomplete pass but it was overturned on review. It was a very tough call to make on the field and the replay system worked perfectly to help the officials! The announcer showed his ignorance by saying the U had the best view of the play. Even though he was looking right at it, he would have been shielded by the receiver and would not have been able to see the ball. Just because he's the closest doesn't mean he has the best angle.

What a flurry!!

I think that the pylon shouldn't be used to judge in bounds/out of bounds in this case (although i didn't see the play).

Hypothetical and weird play just to discuss a point (NFL rules):

What if the receiver catches the ball in the right corner of the endzone. Left foot is down and shoulders are square to the end line. Receiver stands on one foot with the left, then with the other, swings it around counter-clockwise while pivoting on the left, kicks the very top of the pylon, then continues to spin and lands with the whole right foot in bounds and shoulders are facing the other endzone.

Wouldn't this be a catch even though the receiver hit the pylon, he didn't really step on the ground out of bounds?


NFHS/NCAA you could probably use the pylon as a good measurement for in/out of bounds since the first step has to come down in bounds (so if he hit the pylon, he was probably out of bounds).

I've always understood the pylon is out of bounds so contacting the pylon is the same as touching the ground out of bounds. That's why we move the pylons on the end lines that line up with the in-bounds hashes. They only serve to help the U with the hashes so there is no reason for them to be on the end line. Since they are out of bounds a receiver would be considered out bounds if he hits one of the pylons so you are better safe than sorry if you move the pylons back about 3 yards.

In the definition section of the NFL book it says a player is out of bounds if he touches anything OTHER THAN a playter, an official or a pylon on or outside a boundary line.

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

And yet, the NFL rulebook also says this under "Field Markings:"

"The four intersections of goal lines and sidelines must be marked at inside corners of the end zones and the gaol line by pylons. Pylons must be placed at inside edges of white lines and should not touch the surface of the actual playing field itself."

If it doesn't touch the playing field, it can't be in bounds, right?

:confused:

While we're on the topic, I've never gotten a good answer to this one as it applies to NFHS: How the heck can the pylon be out of bounds and in the end zone, and what does that mean for someone who contacts it?

In NCAA, it means if you stretch the ball forward and it hits the pylon it is a TD.

AS for the NFL I think they are just making an exception because they realize the pylon sticking up from the field could be inadevertently touched even though the player was not actually touching a sideline or out of bounds so they chose not to penalize the players for touching thqat "obstruction".

Remember John Madden and his whole "the goal line extends around the world" commentary. The pylon is on the goal line extended.

If a player (going in) contacts the pylon with the ball while it is in his possession, it is a TD whether he is airborne or not. One could technically say that if he's airborne and he hits the "outside" of the pylon then the ball has crossed the sideline plane prior to touching the pylon so he's short of the goal line- but we don't split hairs like that.

I've always been told that the pylon is out of bounds in the endzone, so in order to touch the pylon with the ball, it actually breaks the plane of the endzone first and results in a touchdown.

REPLY: The rule that TxMike quoted is only for the NFL. For the rest of us NCAA and NFHS types, the pylon is OOB behind the goal line. The NFL changed that rule a few seasons back when a receiver left the ground the catch a pass at the goal line. On his way up, his outside foot kicked the pylon. He controlled the ball in the air and returned to the ground with both feet inbounds. Unfortunately for him, the side judge's hat was on the ground. They changed the rule the following season.

:confused:

Still.

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.

REPLY: If I'm not mistaken, the NFL rule still requires him to land inbounds. It only ignores his touching of the pylon.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

:confused: