GT, I don't see anything in this example that states whether B1's contact drove A1 backward, laterally, or forward before going out of bounds. Unless there's more information to add I don't see anything that contradicts Bob M's interpretation.

Guys, check out case play 4.3.3 (B)

(I misread a rule listing and must delete a statement)

I still say you can't rule forward progress stopped in-bounds as well as having the runner causing the ball to become dead OOB. If you stop the clock then you must mark the ball where it crossed the side line. 2-41-3 says the dead-ball spot is where the ball becomes dead by rule. 2-41-5 says the OOB spot is where it became dead by going OOB. These are different spots in this play and only one of them is a clear clock stopper.

But in my 12 years of officiating I still have yet to see a force-out play.

Grant, I disagree with you. The only thing we need to determine is if the A player would have returned to the ground inbounds or not. If the B player prevented A from returning the ground inbounds, it does not matter what directions they were moving in, together or not. If B carries A 5 yards and drops him OOB, A gets the completion and the forward progress spot.

He doesn't stop being a runner when his forward progess is stopped.

The down ended out of bounds. Forward progress is always ruled retroactively. You never have a "spot where progress ended" until the ball is dead. A runner whose progress was stopped may, if the ball doesn't meanwhile become dead, pass or advance the ball beyond that point. The ball may become dead by various means and under various conditions, and the timing rules reflect how the ball became dead, not where the spot will be marked.

Robert

The down does not end when he gets driven out of bounds, even if you do wait forever to actually rule progress is stopped. The down ended at the forward progress spot by rule. See 4-2-2a The ball becomes dead and the down is ended: ..., is held so his forward progress is stopped,...
Once again, how can you say a ball that is dead by rule in bounds because forward progress is stopped is afterwards also dead out of bounds allowing you to stop the clock?

The argument to not stop the clock has to do with forward progress. In the example play the forward progress of the receiver was stopped and he was driven backward so that he came down OOB. Now we have two spots, one forward progress spot and one OOB spot. These aren't the same spot. Thus if forward progress is to be used then its spot must be used and since that is ahead of the OOB then the ball must have become dead prior to going OOB.

However if we look at the definition of a catch then the player must come down with possession of the ball. If he does not finalize his possession of the ball until touching the ground that means in this situation that the ball became dead OOB as you can't catch a dead ball. The ball had to remain live until the catch was completed. That would seem to say that we should stop the clock.

Now I don't think the Rule Book really comes out and says directly if we are to stop the clock or not on this play. I think that 3.4.3 C does specify that the receiver was driven backward and we have a spot of forward progress though that may be argued.

3.4.3 SITUATION C Receiver A1 controls a pass while airborne near A’s sideline. B1 contacts A1 who then lands out of bounds in possession of the ball. The covering official rules a completed pass because B1’s contact caused A1 to land out of bounds. RULING: The clock is stopped because of the receiver being out of bounds, not due to his forward progress being stopped in-bounds; therefore, the clock will start with the snap.

So maybe I have changed my own mind. I did realize now that I misread one of these plays earlier and must edit a previous post.

ok then, where are you going to spot the ball? Because if you are not going to kill the ball due to forward progress, then I think you are going to have to spot the ball at the OOB spot. Is that what happens? I don't think so.
What appears to be happening here is for some reason, the casebook is attempting to trump rule 4-2-2 with rule 3-4-3 and I'm not at all convinced it should do so. You are ruling a catch because you find the receiver would have come down in bounds barring the action of B which has stopped progress and drove him OOB prior to being able to complete the catch by touching the ground. So, you have ruled a catch under an exception that also involves stopped progress. Rule 4-2-2 rules with stopped progress the ball is dead right at that spot. Clock stoppage at that point comes under the various 3-4 rules. At best you should only have a stopped clock that is going to start on the ready, you may have a running clock. But I still can't see, despite what the casebook says (because I think it is wrong) how you can give the receiver his progress spot and then also rule you have a live ball out of bounds.

The key is where the ball will be spotted for the next play.

Is the spot where receiver A went OOB? Or, is the spot where his progress was stopped inbounds?

If OOB, clock stops. If at progress spot, clock runs.

If the contact causes A to move laterally or backwards [think a forward vs. backwards pass] : clock runs, even if the contact forces A OOB.

Rick, that's straight from the case book. I don't have this year's books yet and online isn't working, but look at 7.5.2 L (c) from last year's case book. In the ruling it says "... the added force in the general direction the player was moving, is not considered a factor affecting his spot of landing...."

So if B contacts A from behind in the same direction A was moving to begin with, B's contact is not a factor in determining whether it was a catch or not. If A lands OOB after being contacted by B and forced in the same direction he was originally heading, the pass is ruled OOB.

This is something that is often overlooked since it is in the case book only and not in the rule book. That's one reason why I brought up my original point.

Warren et al.,

IMO, this play means that the player was driven out laterally or forward and not backwards. If he was driven out backwards, then the clock would run since his forward progress was stopped inbounds. In the case book play above, if you are ruling the play down OOB due to B's contact, the change in direction caused by B's force was in an opposite direction A was heading (see my previous post) and was either forward or lateral thus the player being OOB and necessitating the stopage of the clock.

Robert, what happens to the down when forward progress is stopped? It ends, right? So any action after forward progress is stopped has no bearing on the status of the clock. If the player controls the ball airborne while in bounds and then is driven backwards OOB by B, his progress was stopped in bounds and the fact that he is driven backwards OOB is moot.

Picture it this way, a runner is running parallel to the sideline and is stood up by a DB and driven backwards OOB. What's the clock status on this play? Where do you mark the ball dead? At the foremost point of the ball before his progress was stopped, right? So what's the clock status on this play? It's running, right? Because his progress was stopped in bounds prior to being driven OOB and the ball was dead at the point his forward progress was stopped.

The Case Book play I posted was from the 2008 book. The only point I can see about this situation is that it might not be exactly the play we are discussing. However it does mention forward progress being stopped in-bounds in the ruling. Even though I still think the better call is to keep the clock running I think that the rules and rules interpretation better support stopping the clock on this.

When a runner is first held by an opponent and has no forward progess, an interval begins during which the question of whether he's been "held" for purposes of determining the ball dead is in abeyance. The runner may be able to resume forward progress, or may pass or fumble the ball, or the ball may become dead for some other reason, before it can be determined that the runner has indeed been held.

Once the ball is dead, then the question of awarding the spot comes into play. Forward progress must be allowed for regardless of whether the player was so "held" or the ball became dead for some other reason.

So, for example, a runner may be knocked backwards by an opponent who has no more than momentary contact with him. It is quite conceivable that the runner may regain balance and eventually advance beyond that point, and it is also conceivable that the runner may touch out of bounds or have some part of his body other than hands or feet touch the ground before he can advance beyond that point. Either way, he gains the benefit of that point of progress, but in one case the ball is dead out of bounds and the other in bounds.

During the interval in which the runner's forward progress was stopped by an opponent (whether he holds him or not), time counts and the down has not ended. The reason the ball became dead may be that an opponent held him and stopped his progress, or it may be some other reason, but the runner's progress determines the dead ball spot even if the ball was not at that spot at the time it became dead and even if that was not the reason for the ball's becoming dead.

So yeah, the runner gets the spot of forward progress and the clock gets stopped in the case at hand.

Robert

So because A was pushed and not controled, we would give him the progress spot and stop the clock because he went OOB? I disagree with that although the case book apparently says different.