Just the toes or the whole foot?

[Adam]

I was watching the Nebraska/Missouri game and saw the would-be-touchdown ruled incomplete because the receive didn't have his foot down in bounds. Replays showed he landed on his toe and kept the heel off the ground for a moment, maintaining control the whole time, before falling backwards out of bounds.

His toe was inside the line, but once the heel came down it was on the line.

They reviewed it in the booth but upheld the call on the field.

My question: what's the rule on this? Does a planted toe qualify as in bounds, or only a dragged toe?

I know it's possible my view was week, the reception isn't that great in the hotel room and I just don't trust announcers; I'm just wondering what the rule is on this play.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I was watching the Nebraska/Missouri game and saw the would-be-touchdown ruled incomplete because the receive didn't have his foot down in bounds. Replays showed he landed on his toe and kept the heel off the ground for a moment, maintaining control the whole time, before falling backwards out of bounds.

His toe was inside the line, but once the heel came down it was on the line.

They reviewed it in the booth but upheld the call on the field.

My question: what's the rule on this? Does a planted toe qualify as in bounds, or only a dragged toe?

I know it's possible my view was week, the reception isn't that great in the hotel room and I just don't trust announcers; I'm just wondering what the rule is on this play.

CANADIAN RULING:

Incomplete pass.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: I didn't see the play, so I can't comment on that particular call. But to complete the catch, all the player needs to do is maintain control and his first contact with the ground is inbounds. It can be a toe, a heel, the whole foot, his butt, an elbow, his head, a knee, both knees, ....

Also, if his first contact with the ground jars the ball loose, it should be ruled an incomplete pass.

[MJT]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: I didn't see the play, so I can't comment on that particular call. But to complete the catch, all the player needs to do is maintain control and his first contact with the ground is inbounds. It can be a toe, a heel, the whole foot, his butt, an elbow, his head, a knee, both knees, ....

Also, if his first contact with the ground jars the ball loose, it should be ruled an incomplete pass.

Bob, I was thinking at one time I heard/read something about the toe being in and the heal coming down on the line as being incomplete, but I cannot find anything on it. Am I just in a fog, or have any others of you heard that?

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: I didn't see the play, so I can't comment on that particular call. But to complete the catch, all the player needs to do is maintain control and his first contact with the ground is inbounds. It can be a toe, a heel, the whole foot, his butt, an elbow, his head, a knee, both knees, ....

Also, if his first contact with the ground jars the ball loose, it should be ruled an incomplete pass.

The last sentence is interesting. The WSU/ASU game had a similar situation that we all thought would certainly be overturned. The receiver caught the ball in the EZ, took two steps, went to a knee in the EZ, then when he hit the ground, the ball popped loose. The field official ruled it incomplete, then after review, the call was upheld. Of course one cannot trust the announcers (even the radio ones).

Here's a Youtube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjLFg9tGRxg

Complete or incomplete? Based upon your last sentence, sounds like the correct call.

[Jim D]

The play in the Missouri/Nebraska game was unusual in that it looked like the player came down on his toe with his heel clearly off the ground and then turned a bit and then the heel came down on the line. I really was suprised when it was not overturned. It was the type of play that instant replay was designed for, but it didn't work in this case.

Possession was never a question on the play. The player had it securely the whole time.

I agree it was a great play. I don' t know how the player knew where he was enough to do that. Luckily, Missouri scored more than enough points that it made no difference.

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by Suudy

The last sentence is interesting. The WSU/ASU game had a similar situation that we all thought would certainly be overturned. The receiver caught the ball in the EZ, took two steps, went to a knee in the EZ, then when he hit the ground, the ball popped loose. The field official ruled it incomplete, then after review, the call was upheld. Of course one cannot trust the announcers (even the radio ones).

Here's a Youtube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjLFg9tGRxg

Complete or incomplete? Based upon your last sentence, sounds like the correct call.

My last sentence referred to a situation where the first contact with the ground jars the ball loose. For example, receiver lays out (airborne) and secures the ball, firmly holding it. Now as he hits the ground, the ball pops loose. Incomplete pass. The youTube play you posted isn't what I was referring to. I can't say why that call (incomplete pass) was upheld. Once that first foot hits the ground in the endzone, the ball is dead, right? What happens afterwards is immaterial.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

My last sentence referred to a situation where the first contact with the ground jars the ball loose. For example, receiver lays out (airborne) and secures the ball, firmly holding it. Now as he hits the ground, the ball pops loose. Incomplete pass. The youTube play you posted isn't what I was referring to. I can't say why that call (incomplete pass) was upheld. Once that first foot hits the ground in the endzone, the ball is dead, right? What happens afterwards is immaterial.

I have a completed pass as well. A1 has the ball IB and when he slides OOB, whatever happens is immaterial, as the play is over.

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

My last sentence referred to a situation where the first contact with the ground jars the ball loose. For example, receiver lays out (airborne) and secures the ball, firmly holding it. Now as he hits the ground, the ball pops loose. Incomplete pass. The youTube play you posted isn't what I was referring to. I can't say why that call (incomplete pass) was upheld. Once that first foot hits the ground in the endzone, the ball is dead, right? What happens afterwards is immaterial.

Thanks for the response (you too Juggling).

However, there is some talk amongst some fans (granted, not the most authoritative) that there is some "new" NCAA rule that "you have to keep control of the ball even after you hit the ground, out of bounds". This sounds like bunk to me. Now, given that you, Bob, work Fed, and you, Juggling, work Canadian, I understand you ruling it a TD. However, is there some NCAA'ism that could make this incomplete? Is there anything in the NCAA that would justify this being called incomplete?

[bossman72]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

My last sentence referred to a situation where the first contact with the ground jars the ball loose. For example, receiver lays out (airborne) and secures the ball, firmly holding it. Now as he hits the ground, the ball pops loose. Incomplete pass. The youTube play you posted isn't what I was referring to. I can't say why that call (incomplete pass) was upheld. Once that first foot hits the ground in the endzone, the ball is dead, right? What happens afterwards is immaterial.

The replay official must have judged that the ball wasn't securely held- that's the only thing i can think of why it was upheld.

[grantsrc]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I was watching the Nebraska/Missouri game and saw the would-be-touchdown ruled incomplete because the receive didn't have his foot down in bounds. Replays showed he landed on his toe and kept the heel off the ground for a moment, maintaining control the whole time, before falling backwards out of bounds.

His toe was inside the line, but once the heel came down it was on the line.

They reviewed it in the booth but upheld the call on the field.

My question: what's the rule on this? Does a planted toe qualify as in bounds, or only a dragged toe?

I know it's possible my view was week, the reception isn't that great in the hotel room and I just don't trust announcers; I'm just wondering what the rule is on this play.

I watched it too and he made one heck of an effort. In fact, I worked two or three of his games when he was in HS. Great athlete.

The Big 12, and some other conferences possible, have a "heel-toe" philosophy. If only the toe comes down, it is a catch. If the toe contacts first and the the heel comes down OOB, then no catch. In this case, he clearly hits inbounds with his toe but then the heel comes down on the line so OOB.

The thing I noticed was that when they announced the results after review, they said the play stands as called. That shows me that there wasn't enough evidence to support or over rule the call made on field. I was always under the impression it was "Stands as called", "confirms the ruling on the field", or "overturns the call on the field."