2 Questions about the Monday night game...

[AlabamaBlue]

1st situation, I can't remember who had the ball, but A had a tight end to the left and a wideout to the left who was covering up the tight end. It was a running play, but the wing flagged it at the snap. The R's explanation was it was an illegal formation because an eligible receiver was covered up at the snap. They had 7 on the line and it wasn't a pass, any idea why this was flagged?

2nd situation I'm curious about is the Keyshawn Johnson catch that was ruled incomplete in the endzone. The deep wing wasn't in the best position to rule on in/out of bounds, and the replay showed that Johnson's elbow first landed in bounds. The Panthers tried to review, but the R said it wasn't reviewable. Why not? Also, was the deep wing in the correct position (about 5 yards past the goal line and 2 -3 yards OOB, the catch happened right in front of him but he had no angle on the OOB line.)? The wing official was running up the line behind the play, but the deep wing signaled incomplete immediately without even looking to the wing.

[ChickenOfNC]

Originally Posted by AlabamaBlue

1st situation, I can't remember who had the ball, but A had a tight end to the left and a wideout to the left who was covering up the tight end. It was a running play, but the wing flagged it at the snap. The R's explanation was it was an illegal formation because an eligible receiver was covered up at the snap. They had 7 on the line and it wasn't a pass, any idea why this was flagged?

2nd situation I'm curious about is the Keyshawn Johnson catch that was ruled incomplete in the endzone. The deep wing wasn't in the best position to rule on in/out of bounds, and the replay showed that Johnson's elbow first landed in bounds. The Panthers tried to review, but the R said it wasn't reviewable. Why not? Also, was the deep wing in the correct position (about 5 yards past the goal line and 2 -3 yards OOB, the catch happened right in front of him but he had no angle on the OOB line.)? The wing official was running up the line behind the play, but the deep wing signaled incomplete immediately without even looking to the wing.

Not completely clear on NFL rules but here goes:

I believe the NFL has a rule where an eligible receiver cannot be covered up, regardless of what happens during the play. I may be wrong there, but they have some very different rules regarding that type of stuff.

On the pass, I think Carolina tried to challenge whether he was forced OOB, which apparently you're not able to challenge in the NFL. So they weren't challenging whether he was simply in or out, but that he was forced out, which can't be challenged.

[AndrewMcCarthy]

While everyone was fixated on the elbow hitting down in the end zone before he landed out of bounds, they missed the most important part- he never caught the ball.

You would think the coach would know they can't challenge a force out- and I don't think the receiver was really contacted on this play anyway. I wonder if Carolina really wanted to challenge that he came down inbounds with his elbow and the R told him the ball was never caught.

The previous poster is correct- you can't "cover" an eligible number in the NFL.

[mikesears]

Originally Posted by AlabamaBlue

1st situation, I can't remember who had the ball, but A had a tight end to the left and a wideout to the left who was covering up the tight end. It was a running play, but the wing flagged it at the snap. The R's explanation was it was an illegal formation because an eligible receiver was covered up at the snap. They had 7 on the line and it wasn't a pass, any idea why this was flagged?

Under NFL rules, eligibles by number MUST be lined up in eligible positions and ineligibles by number MUST be lined up in ineligible positions. They can only swap eligibility status by reporting in to the Referee.

2nd situation I'm curious about is the Keyshawn Johnson catch that was ruled incomplete in the endzone. The deep wing wasn't in the best position to rule on in/out of bounds, and the replay showed that Johnson's elbow first landed in bounds. The Panthers tried to review, but the R said it wasn't reviewable. Why not? Also, was the deep wing in the correct position (about 5 yards past the goal line and 2 -3 yards OOB, the catch happened right in front of him but he had no angle on the OOB line.)? The wing official was running up the line behind the play, but the deep wing signaled incomplete immediately without even looking to the wing.

I don't know if the elbow landing inbounds is considered a completed pass under NFL rules. I would love to hear the NFL address this play.

NFL replay rules do not allow a force out to be challenged. If I had been Carolina's coach, I wouldn't have been challenging the force out. I'd have been challenging that the receiver made contact inbounds. Andrew may be correct in that they didn't feel the receiver actually caught the ball.

Mechanically, the deep wing was fine with his mechanics of signaling incomplete. I've been told that if it is incomplete, you don't need to wait for the other official. Come in and wave it off.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ChickenOfNC

Not completely clear on NFL rules but here goes:

I believe the NFL has a rule where an eligible receiver cannot be covered up, regardless of what happens during the play. I may be wrong there, but they have some very different rules regarding that type of stuff.

On the pass, I think Carolina tried to challenge whether he was forced OOB, which apparently you're not able to challenge in the NFL. So they weren't challenging whether he was simply in or out, but that he was forced out, which can't be challenged.

An ineligible cannot line up in an eligible position in the NFL without reporting. An eligible cannot line up in an ineligible position. This includes an end covering up a "tight end."

This evil little set of rules is why I've had coaches in VARSITY GAMES try to have a player report himself eligible.

Not to mention a varsity head coach in the area's biggest conference trying to argue players were ineligibly downfield.....ON A PUNT.

I have a stock answer for coaches...."That's a Sunday rule, Jim." For ones I like I'll add..."and if we were working on Sunday we'd make a lot more money."