Rule Enforcement

[MJT]

Originally Posted by RoyGardner

There was an NCAA rules interpretation issued last year (pretty sure it was by Mr. Adams) that said that the runner (in this case the QB who still has the ball) cannot simultaneously be considered an eligible receiver and therefore the AFD would not be applied in the case where the QB still in possession of the ball, had a 5-yd mask committed against him, and then he threw a legal forward pass.

The bulletin pretty clearly said that the ball carrier by definition is a runner, and that he cannot simultaneously be an eligible receiver in the context of this rule.

I was going to post the same thing Roy, as I was reading down thru the posts. I remember the same thing.

[Jim S]

Of course you could make a case for the imposition of a ten yard illegal hands if the first contact was the grasping of the mask above the shoulder.
Don't have to decide which to take then.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by RoyGardner

There was an NCAA rules interpretation issued last year (pretty sure it was by Mr. Adams) that said that the runner (in this case the QB who still has the ball) cannot simultaneously be considered an eligible receiver and therefore the AFD would not be applied in the case where the QB still in possession of the ball, had a 5-yd mask committed against him, and then he threw a legal forward pass.

The bulletin pretty clearly said that the ball carrier by definition is a runner, and that he cannot simultaneously be an eligible receiver in the context of this rule.

As sec'y of the rules committee, Mr. Adams could be expected to be in on their deliberations. However, I doubt they considered such a case, and I suspect him of "judicial activism" here.

It is legal to throw yourself a forward pass if you're an eligible receiver (or you could get a return pass after giving it to someone else). If the intention of the 5-yards and AFD rule is to prevent the defense from gaining an advantage (as opposed to the personal foul, which is to prevent broken necks), then why should the defense in just this case not get the full penalty for using an illegal tactic to impede the potential receiver?

Robert

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by LeRoy

So with the ball on Team B's 6 yardline and the QB scambles back to the 50 and the tightend comes back to help him and he get's facemasked at the 49 yardline, then the pass is completed to the 48 yard line and the runner is downed there. Are we going back to the 5 yard line for the penatly enforcement? Because the tight end could have went out for a pass?

I guess you're asking a question of game design philosophy. I could ask the related question in the case of no foul, are we going back to the B 6 yard line if an incomplete pass is thrown intended for the TE on the B 48, because the end could have gone downfield?

The NCAA made a decision a long time ago to treat unsuccessful forward pass plays differently from the usual progress of the ball. When the forward pass was first legalized, a forward pass that hit the ground before touching an eligible receiver of the passing team was a live ball that could be recovered and advanced by the opposing team; if it was recovered by the passing team, it was treated as an illegal forward pass and brought back to the spot of the pass. The rules makers decided they wanted to encourage forward passing more, and recognized that a player throwing a forward pass was forfeiting an opportunity to advance the ball from there by running (especially so when the pass had to originate at least 5 yards behind the previous spot), so in compensation for that "loss", they awarded the distance back to the previous spot in case of an incompletion. It was a while before they realized a runner could sometimes benefit from this generosity by deliberately throwing an incomplete forward pass during any play; I don't know how long before intentional grounding was outlawed. Anyway, a different view was taken for "pass plays" than for "running plays", with the idea that most "pass plays" would be so by design, and so would be subject to partly different rules, increasingly so over the years.

It certainly didn't have to be that way, and I'd like to see them go back, but in general that would tend to discourage the passing game compared to what it's become. But you shouldn't complain when rules are adopted that are consistent, and this penalty enforcement seems consistent with the "pass play" philosophy to me.

Robert

[The Roamin' Umpire]

Originally Posted by grantsrc

Yes, contact fouls on an eligible receiver is an automatic first down. But in this case, even though he is eligible I would say that since he is in the act of blocking, the automatic first down wouldn't apply.

BTW- here is a link the NCAA rule book. I save a copy on my computers and my jump drive. That way I always have it!http://www.ncaa.org/library/rules/20...ball_rules.pdf

Grant, thanks. Turns out I already had the link, but our connection at work is so slow (I teach in a public high school with, shall we say, limited resources.) that by the time it had finished downloading, my lunch break would have been over.

[grantsrc]

Originally Posted by The Roamin' Umpire

Grant, thanks. Turns out I already had the link, but our connection at work is so slow (I teach in a public high school with, shall we say, limited resources.) that by the time it had finished downloading, my lunch break would have been over.

Yeah, I am lucky, the district I teach in just updated our connection to fiber optic cable. Either way, having it on the jump drive is certainly convenient.

[The Roamin' Umpire]

Originally Posted by grantsrc

Yeah, I am lucky, the district I teach in just updated our connection to fiber optic cable. Either way, having it on the jump drive is certainly convenient.

Clearly, what I should do is start it downloading one morning. It'll finish sometime that day, and then I've got it on the local network, which is much better since it doesn't have to pass through the obnoxious and slow web filters each time I want to look at it.

[cmathews]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

As sec'y of the rules committee, Mr. Adams could be expected to be in on their deliberations. However, I doubt they considered such a case, and I suspect him of "judicial activism" here.

It is legal to throw yourself a forward pass if you're an eligible receiver (or you could get a return pass after giving it to someone else). If the intention of the 5-yards and AFD rule is to prevent the defense from gaining an advantage (as opposed to the personal foul, which is to prevent broken necks), then why should the defense in just this case not get the full penalty for using an illegal tactic to impede the potential receiver?

Robert

I for one, will take Dr. Adams' word on any give situation as the Gospel. On the occasions that he wouldn't "consult" the committee, he certainly was there to discuss the intent of the rules when and as they were written.

I also tend to agree that you cannont simultaneously be a runner and eligible receiver. It just doesn't make sense.

[DJ_NV]

pretty basic question I know, but does anyone know where I can find the definition of an "Eligible Receiver" in the NCAA rulebook?

[MJT]

Here it is from the NCAA rule book. You can download the NCAA rulebook here. http://www.ncaa.org/library/rules/20...ball_rules.pdf

Eligibility to Touch Legal Pass
ARTICLE 3. Eligibility rules apply during a down when a legal forward
pass is thrown. All Team B players are eligible to touch or catch a pass.
When the ball is snapped, the following Team A players are eligible:
a. Each player who is in an end position on his scrimmage line and who is
wearing a number other than 50 through 79 (A.R. 7-3-3-I).
b. Each player who is legally positioned as a back wearing a number other
than 50 through 79.
c. A player wearing a number other than 50 through 79 in position to
receive a hand-to-hand snap from between the snapper’s legs.
Eligibility Lost by Going Out of Bounds
ARTICLE 4. No eligible offensive receiver who goes out of bounds during
a down shall touch a legal forward pass in the field of play or end zones or
while airborne until it has been touched by an opponent or official (A.R.
7-3-4-I-III).
Exception: This does not apply to an eligible offensive player who
attempts to return inbounds immediately after being blocked out of bounds
by an opponent (A.R. 7-3-4-IV).
Eligibility Gained or Regained
ARTICLE 5. When a Team B player or an official touches a legal forward
pass, all players become eligible (A.R. 7-3-5-I).