Question for the board

[daggo66]

You always give forward progress, period. There is no rule that makes an exception. Forward progress and OOB have no interactive relationship. Ruling one, does not cause the other. Your example of a player being stopped IB and then pushed OOB makes no sense in regard to the clock. The play is over when forward momentum (progress) is stopped. Let's say a player is running toward his opponent's goal line, he reaches forward, extending the ball OOB over the goal line extended, but is knocked OOB at the 1 yard line. Do you not have a TD? Did you not award forward progress? Did you not rule that he was knocked OOB?

[Bob M.]

REPLY: When the receiver is driven backwards and OOB, of course you give him his forward progress. But remember that his forward progress was awarded inbounds and therefore there is no reason to stop the clock for a runner being OOB. Keep it running. If however there was a foul during the play, or if that forward progress was beyond the line to gain, you will be stopping the clock, but for a different reason. And that reason will cause the clock to next start on the RFP.

[grantsrc]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: When the receiver is driven backwards and OOB, of course you give him his forward progress. But remember that his forward progress was awarded inbounds and therefore there is no reason to stop the clock for a runner being OOB. Keep it running. If however there was a foul during the play, or if that forward progress was beyond the line to gain, you will be stopping the clock, but for a different reason. And that reason will cause the clock to next start on the RFP.

I agree with Bob. His forward progress was stopped inbounds and that means the clock keeps running.

Now something I am sure you guys all know and talked about at your meeting, but if the force from B forces A in the same direction he is heading and lands OOB, you have no catch. The force by B has to change the direction of A in order to award a catch when A lands OOB.

[ChickenOfNC]

So am I to interpret case play 3.4.3 C to mean the clock will be stopped only if the receiver was NOT driven backward OOB?

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by ChickenOfNC

So am I to interpret case play 3.4.3 C to mean the clock will be stopped only if the receiver was NOT driven backward OOB?

The clock will be stopped even if contact by B1 causes A1 to land out of bounds backwards. A catch by definition occurs when control is established in flight (NFHS 2-4-1) and the pass ends when it is caught (2-31-4). His forward progress was stopped when the pass ended and he became a runner (4-2-2a). The ball ended out of bounds as caused by B1's contact, therefore, the clock is stopped (3-4-4e).

His forward progress is determined by where he caught the ball. B1's contact caused the ball to be placed out of bounds. Consider, if B1 wanted the clock to keep running he should have let A1 touch the ground then stopped his progress. Also, take a look at Case Book 2.15.1.

Have to say this was tricky as it took four different rules to come to the conclusion in the Case Book.

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

The clock will be stopped even if contact by B1 causes A1 to land out of bounds backwards. A catch by definition occurs when control is established in flight (NFHS 2-4-1) and the pass ends when it is caught (2-31-4). His forward progress was stopped when the kick ended and he became a runner (4-2-2a). The ball ended out of bounds as caused by B1's contact, therefore, the clock is stopped (3-4-4e).

His forward progress is determined by where he caught the ball. B1's contact caused the ball to be placed out of bounds. Consider, if B1 wanted the clock to keep running he should have let A1 touch the ground then stopped his progress. Also, take a look at Case Book 2.15.1.

Have to say this was tricky as it took four different rules to come to the conclusion in the Case Book.

REPLY: Ed...I must disagree. Take a good look at the definition of 'catch.' The receiver can complete a catch in one of two ways: (1) touching the ground inbounds (he didn't), or (2) being contacted by an opponent so that he's prevented from returning to the ground inbounds. This guy satisfied the second condition, so that he completed the catch inbounds, and the clock should continue to run. It's the full definition of catch that leads to the correct ruling.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: Ed...I must disagree. Take a good look at the definition of 'catch.' The receiver can complete a catch in one of two ways: (1) touching the ground inbounds (he didn't), or (2) being contacted by an opponent so that he's prevented from returning to the ground inbounds. This guy satisfied the second condition, so that he completed the catch inbounds, and the clock should continue to run. It's the full definition of catch that leads to the correct ruling.

Bob, I agreed with you until I tried to determine the logic used for the Case Book and frankly if I saw this play, the might still clock would still be running.

The action of B1 kept A1 from landing inbounds. If you look at 3.4.3 Ruling it supports stopping the clock because A1 landed out of bounds. When you add being pushed backwards out of bounds the only change is where A1 lands. Then look at 2.15.1(b) which agrees in principle with 3.4.3 that action by the opponent will affect the result of the play as it pertains to boundaries.

Futhermore, if A1 came down inbounds and then was pushed out of bounds by B1 the clock would be stopped.

When did the down end? The act of catching the ball would not end the down. The only time a catch would end the down is if A1 and B1 jointly possessed the ball. That would end the down and keep the clock moving as the ball would become dead inbounds.

If B1 managed to tackle A1 inbounds that would end the down and keep the clock moving.

I think the point of 3.4.3 is the play remains alive until the ball is out of bounds. The catch is just a part of the live ball play.

[Niner]

Bob, I agree with you.

[Rick KY]

Originally Posted by grantsrc

...Now something I am sure you guys all know and talked about at your meeting, but if the force from B forces A in the same direction he is heading and lands OOB, you have no catch. The force by B has to change the direction of A in order to award a catch when A lands OOB.

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.

[grantsrc]

Originally Posted by Rick KY

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.

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.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: When the receiver is driven backwards and OOB, of course you give him his forward progress. But remember that his forward progress was awarded inbounds and therefore there is no reason to stop the clock for a runner being OOB.

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

[Mike L]

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?

[Warrenkicker]

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.

[Mike L]

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.

[ODJ]

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.