Couple of questions

[Bob M.]

[I posted this on the NFHS board also, so some may have already seen it.]

REPLY: bisonlj hit the nail on the head as to why this play confuses people--simply they try to read too much into it. The acual governing rule is NF 4-3-2 which in part says, "If the ball touches a pylon, it is out-of-bounds behind the goal line." The key words "...behind the goal line" are enough to suggest that the Fed wants us to rule that the ball must have crossed the goal line prior to striking the pylon. That's sufficient to rule this play a touchback.

Remember that the pylon is just an artifical means of identifying the intersection of the goal line and sideline. The actual intersection has no real dimension...it's just a vertical line, just as the goal line and sidelines have no dimension either. We choose to make them 4" wide. But you have to give some dimension to the pylon so that we can see it! The rulesmakers decided that it should be 4" x 4". The fact that a 4" front exists does cause folks to overthink the ruling: Did it strike the front? Did it strike the inside face? Did the ball hit the front inside corner? It doesn't matter. For consistency,the Fed wants any ball that strikes the pylon to be deemed as having crossed the goal line and then gone out of bounds.

I actually think a better placement for the pylon would be on the goal line with its ouside face lining up on the inside edge of the sideline. In other words, have it be completely inbounds. Then no one would ever be confused again about a ball striking a pylon--loose or in player possession.

[stevestod]

Question 1- You can use some common sense on putting the ball on the 1 foot line. If it's a high school game and the team receiving the ball is behind by 30; maybe you should put it on the 20 first and ten.

Question 2- Bob has a great idea about putting the pylon completely inbounds, I have always called it a touch-back when it hit the pylon. I double check where it is when I line up on a kick-off and fix it if need be to make sure it's out of bounds.

[Theisey]

Originally Posted by stevestod

...
Question 2- Bob has a great idea about putting the pylon completely inbounds, I have always called it a touch-back when it hit the pylon. I double check where it is when I line up on a kick-off and fix it if need be to make sure it's out of bounds.

I don't mean to nit-pick, but just where are you placing the Pylon??

FR19 of the NCAA book (viewable online at the NCAA site) has the pylon placement illustrated that is 100% applicable for all rule codes. Since I don't see a way to link to that image so I can post that illustration, please look at it and tell me that is where you are placing the pylon.

That's the proper and only place it should be placed. If that's what you call "out of bounds" then OK, I agree. The proper placement would be at the inside intersections of the sidelines and goal lines.

Here's a link to the book: http://www.ncaa.org/library/rules/20...ball_rules.pdf

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by Theisey

I don't mean to nit-pick, but just where are you placing the Pylon??

FR19 of the NCAA book (viewable online at the NCAA site) has the pylon placement illustrated that is 100% applicable for all rule codes. Since I don't see a way to link to that image so I can post that illustration, please look at it and tell me that is where you are placing the pylon.

That's the proper and only place it should be placed. If that's what you call "out of bounds" then OK, I agree. The proper placement would be at the inside intersections of the sidelines and goal lines.

Here's a link to the book: http://www.ncaa.org/library/rules/20...ball_rules.pdf

That is where I'm placing the pylon. Are you saying you think the pylon is in-bounds? I'm having a hard time understanding your comments.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: Tom...I think everybody agrees where the rules call for it to be placed, i.e. so that it is completely out of bounds where the inside front corner of the pylon corresponds to the actual intersection of the goal line and sideline--just like the picture in the NCAA rule book. But this causes confusion because people feel that if the ball strikes the pylon anywhere outside that corner, then it must have crossed the sideline prior to that and been OOB somwhere short of the goal line. I know that's not what the rule says, but people think that way.

I was suggesting a change such that the pylon be placed completely inbounds so that its outside edge corresponds to the inside edge of the sideline. That way there would be no confusion whatsoever that if the ball hit the pylon-whether loose or in player possession, then it had to cross the goal line inbounds. I can't think of any downsides to that other than the possibility of a player tripping over it.

[Theisey]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

....
I was suggesting a change such that the pylon be placed completely inbounds so that its outside edge corresponds to the inside edge of the sideline. That way there would be no confusion whatsoever that if the ball hit the pylon-whether loose or in player possession, then it had to cross the goal line inbounds. I can't think of any downsides to that other than the possibility of a player tripping over it.

Sorry for a late reply, I've been busy doing other things..

All we really need are some better words in the rule book, case book and a few good illustrations to describe what happens when a ball, loose or in player possession passes to the inside of the pylon, over the top of the pylon or to the outside of the pylon.

We have some words today, but they still seems to bring up questions and cause unnecessary confusion of what to rule.

Placement of a pylon fully inbounds would cause more trouble as I see it if a loose ball would to hit it and deflect into the EZ. We have some pylons up here that while made of rubber, would take 100 MPH winds to knock them over. So a loose ball striking it could easily be kept inbounds.

I just don't see why this is causing so much grief.

Say, have you been watching those two topics over on the NFHS forum? The one called "another goal line question" and "receiving a kick right at the line". Why is there so much confusion over the results of those plays? What are our books missing in definitions and rules that make these plays so difficult to rule on. I just don't see it, but from the responses, confusion reigns.

[The Roamin' Umpire]

Originally Posted by Theisey

Say, have you been watching those two topics over on the NFHS forum? The one called "another goal line question" and "receiving a kick right at the line". Why is there so much confusion over the results of those plays? What are our books missing in definitions and rules that make these plays so difficult to rule on. I just don't see it, but from the responses, confusion reigns.

Well, I started the second one - doesn't seem to be too much confusion, other than when I first replied to a play in a different thread, I'd forgotten about the momentum exception.

As for the other thread, most of the argument is over what constitutes a catch. The definition is there, but it's really very difficult to pin down exactly what should and should not be a catch without a page-and-a-half of text. The NCAA has some very solid direction about what they want to be a catch, but it's not really in the book. The NFHS has no such top-down guidance, certainly not with the large number of film clips needed to really make it crystal clear.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

I actually think a better placement for the pylon would be on the goal line with its ouside face lining up on the inside edge of the sideline. In other words, have it be completely inbounds. Then no one would ever be confused again about a ball striking a pylon--loose or in player possession.

Like the "fair pole" in baseball?

I can't think of any downsides to that other than the possibility of a player tripping over it.

That, and it gets in the way of other classes of loose ball entering or leaving the end zone. So I say leave it where it is, the rule's simple enough. Maybe you'd modify it in practice when a field doesn't have regulation pylons, and construction cones are used instead.

What I'd like to see is in rugby not killing the ball if the ballcarrier touches the flag stick with anything other than a foot. Too many tries voided (and often a difficult call to see if the ball was touched down first) because of someone's brushing a shoulder against a corner flag stick (and those flexible sticks they use now can bend inward quite a ways) while diving in.

Robert

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

...and it gets in the way of other classes of loose ball entering or leaving the end zone.

REPLY: That's a good point. A fumble rolling into the pylon would still be live but could be 'deflected' by a pylon that's located inbounds and affect the play.