That's a tough one coach!

"BktBallRef" makes a good point! I can't think of a time when I've called "roughing the runner". I don't see that one, or "slamming" a runner in the rule book. I'm not saying what happened wasn't illegal! I didn't see it and I wasn't there! Like I said before, the ref saw something and it seems everyone there agrees that something was there. I think your "street clothes" ref should have stayed out of it!

Rule 9-4-2.g: No player shall make any contact with an opponent which is deemed unecessary and which incites roughness.

To me it's obvious that the original call by the ref was based on that rule! I've just never seen it called when making a tackle. I've always been told you can pretty much do whatever it takes to get the runner down except grab a facemask or helmet opening.

If it was based on that rule, then I agree with you that it's a live ball foul and the period should have been extended. In thinking about it, your guy was a "holder" and I guess I could see a 110 lb. runner being picked up by a 300 lbs. defensive lineman, taken ito the air and slammed to the ground. I might call that one, I guess! But we've got to be careful not to mix up football with WWF. I have seen a runner grabed by the collar from the rear and the tackler threw him down, no call! We've all seen the famous set up on a punt return where this poor guy is getting ready to set up and make a tackle on the guy about to catch the ball and getting blindsided by a blocker setting up a return! Great hits are built into football!

I can see it as a dead ball foul if the tackler puts on a textbook tackle, hands up under the legs. But instead of just putting the runner down on his back, he picks the runner up, carries him a couple of yards (or in your case, a couple of yards out of bounds) and then slaming him down after the officials have blown the whistle to help stop the play. There has to be a time period where it was obvious the whole play (or tackle) should have ended but the tackler just kept on going. In this case, it's definitely a dead ball and the qtr. ends!

Again though, I have to see it to call it either way, or not to call it!!

One more note!

You said: "Slamming a player to the ground after stopping his forward progress (in bounds or out) IS by the rule (illegal personal contact) illegal...according to the rulebook I have.

Keep in mind that if forward progress has been stopped (like I described in the earlier reply) and the officials feel the play ended before the "slam", then it should have been called a "Dead Ball Foul"! Regardless if it's in-bounds or out-of-bounds!

Coach, if the player's forward progress had been stopped, then the ball becomes dead at that point. Any physical contact that occurs after that is a dead ball foul. If the officials ruled the foul was during a dead ball, then they got the enforcement correct. No untimed down. That there is no question about.

You're not going to see a personal foul call on a live ball tackle because the player was tackled too hard. At least, I've never seen one called. It just isn't going to happen. And I don't believe the rule you cited supports it. JMO.

My guess is that if your guy had made tis tackle instead of being tackled, we wouldn't be having this discussion, would we? ;)

Good luck during the rest of the season.

No bskbllref....

I'm having this discussion because there is a loophole...

No where in any of my posts have you seen me complain about the call only the enforcement. I'm a defensive guy by nature and I love a good hit like anyone else thank you very much.

My point is...where is there an enforcement of the penalty if this were to happen at the end of the game?

Or is it "open game" after the final tick? By not allowing an untimed down in this case there is a loophole in the rules.

There should be some form of reason for the white hat to award an untimed down in this case according to the criteria to extended time (only states a foul....no designation on live or dead ball).

The foul was comitted by a player which began the contact during a live ball and drove a player backwards out of bounds and then slammed him to the ground. Common sense says that the intent of the rules would award an untimed down in this case.

When the game is over, the game is over. And as far as common sense goes, I'm afraid you can't apply that to anything the NF publishes. ;)

Coach, this is one you really need to see the play and understand what the official ruled before giving a definitive answer.

NFHS Rule 9-4-2g gives the official latitude as to the matter of unnecessary contact and that which might incite roughness. Therefore, your description of "slamming" and the fact it was out-of-bounds is why the personal foul penalty occurred.

The play was over and the period had ended. Dead ball foul.

Being that it was the second period, enforcement of the penalty will occur on the kickoff for the second half.

National Federation or NCAA does not have a rule for continuing action. Therefore, when a player is down or crosses the sidelines and goes out-of-bounds the play is dead and any action occuring after the play would be a dead ball foul and so it would be administered. NFHS Rule 3-3-5.

Your supposition presupposes the foul was a live ball foul which would have given you a replay according to NFHS rule 3-3-3a that requires the period be extended if a foul is accepted by either team.

What an interesting discussion to which there are some points for debate.

What makes any live ball dead? The ball is not in play NF 2-2-1.

The inside of the plane that defines the area in football determines in or out-of-bounds unlike basketball where you must establish position. On a touchdown, the play is dead when any point of the ball crosses the goal plane.

So, once the player crosses the sideline the play is dead and action on the runner is no longer legal.

But to the Coach's scenario, he used the term "slammed" which I understood to mean action over and above what is necessary. But, point of fact, any action on the runner is unnecessary once he crosses the line.

Personally, my flag gets dirty anytime a defender performs any action against a runner out-of-bounds because the runner may actually relax under the belief he cannot be hit.

As to the point that a play is not over until the runner hits the ground. Apply Fundamental 14. "An official's whistle seldom kills the ball. It is already dead."

The interpretation of seldom covers two things:
1. Inadvertant whistle
2. Play is blown dead as in the runners progress is stopped.

I am sure you have seen plays where the runner gets stopped and it is apparent the play is over. The whistle kills the play.

Ed,

1: "What makes any live ball dead? The ball is not in play NF 2-2-1." Refers to 2-1-1, not 2-2-1.

2: "So, once the player crosses the sideline the play is dead and action on the runner is no longer legal." I feel is also incorrect. The goal-line is a plane as in 2-25-3 but the sidelines are not planes.

The player is only out of bounds as in 2-28-1, when any part of him touches anything, other than another player of game official, who is on or outside a sideline or end-line.

A loose ball is out of bounds as in 2-28-3, when it touches anything, including a player of official, who is out of bounds.

In both cases, a player has to touch the ground out of bounds and a ball has to touch anything out of bounds to be considered out of bounds and DEAD. The play is still LIVE until either one of those happens.

There is only one exception I can think of that the sideline is a plane and that's on a free kick out of bounds in rule 6-1-8 and discussed in the case book under 6.1.8, situation C.

I do agree though that once the runner has crossed the sideline, pretty much any additional hits on him would draw a flag, even if he's still in the air. But that's if the contact wasn't initiated inbounds. In this play, the contact initiated inbounds, near the sideline.

It's been a great discussion on what seems to be a simple play. I still say, you have got to see this play to call it! I'd love to see the film on this play!

Dex, I agree that this has been quite lively. However, the Coach's argument is not whether the foul was live ball or dead ball, but that even though it was a DBF, his team should still get an untimed down. Until the rules are change, which I don't think they will be, there will not be an untimed down for a DBF. And that's whether it's committed prior to the sanp or after the play is over.

BktBallRef, I also agree with you on the way a dead ball foul is administered, but one question the coach asked in his original statement was:

"Should the penalty have been considered a "dead ball" foul since it happened out of bounds...or would it be considered a foul that was on a continuing action? "

That's where I'm getting his question about it being still considered as a live ball foul or not! And so do I! No matter what we say, the official who made the call has to determine if it was a live ball foul or a dead ball foul!

Like I said before, I tend to think it was a dead ball foul but there still could be some question, even though it happened outside the sideline. The penalty could have happened on contact with the ground out of bounds. The ball was dead on contact with the ground out of bounds but in the opinion of the ref, the penalty was the result of what the tackler was preparing to do before contact with the ground.

Am I sick because I like these kind of discussions?

I stand corrected with the exception anytime contact is initiated out-of-bounds it is unnecessary.

I would love to see this play myself.

The fact according the information given is the clock had expired, therefore, regardless if the runner was stopped inbounds of out-of-bounds, extra action occurred on the runner when the ball was dead.

I read into what Coach said was the play was near the sideline and the runner and the defender continued to a point out of bounds. At that point, the play was dead. B's action, and I have seen this happen, was over and above the action, and Coach said 'slammed', was unnecessary to stop the play on two reasons:
- Play was out-of-bounds
- Action by A runner had been stopped

I see the ruling being the same under both NHFS and Canadian rules - ball dead once out of bounds, yards not gained at that point. The dead ball foul - even for UR - doesn't change the posession going to the defensive team.

Now, this makes me think back to Friday night. Friday night our QB did the keeper and was ran out of bounds. We had naturally created a gap in the sidelines so he could slow himself down. The referee did not blow his whistle till the QB ran into me and I was atleat 4 yrds OOB near a bench stretching a player. So the theroy that the ball is not dead untill the player/ball touches something OOB and there is no "plane" for OOB could be considered correct. Im in LA and we're NFHS.org so things could be different.

The LJ was no more than a yard infront of where the QB ran out of bounds because he ran out on the line of scrimage.

Just don't confuse the issue of when the ball becomes dead. The referee's whistle has nothing to do with it. When the player steps OOB, the ball is dead. It then becomes the defense's rsponsibility to recognize that the opponent is OOB, the ball is dead and the runner should not be hit.

"There's nothing illegal about "slamming" a player to the ground during a tackle."

I guess you didn't see the Green Bay/Chicago game in 1986(?) when a Packer lineman did a body slam on Jim McMahon.

Bob