Question for the board
 

This came up in our local clinic last night:

Airborne receiver catches a pass and the defender forces him OOB where he first touches the ground OOB. I think we'll all agree that, by rule, if the WR would have come down inbounds without the contact, this a catch.

The question is about forward progress and clock status. The case book addresses the clock under 3.4.3 sit C, which is that the clock shall be stopped in this situation. However, it is unclear whether this would be the case if the airborne WR is driven backwards OOB. Do we give the receiver both forward progress AND a stopped clock?

I'm leaning toward him getting both. There is a case play addressing forward progress of an airborne receiver (somewhere in Rule 2) as it pertains to the end zone. The ruling is that is airborne above the endzone and a defender forces back to the field of play, it is a TD. So obviously an airborne WR forced backward is entitled to forward progress.

Some dissension in our group on this, so I thought I'd throw it out there.

Canadian Ruling
 

CANADIAN RULING:

The rulings depend on a few things, as outlined in the bullets below:

• Before the 3-minute warning
  • Pushed OOB further than the spot of catch
    • Forward progress is the spot where the ball crosses the plane of the sideline
    • Clock is stopped when the ball carrier lands OOB
    • Clock on the RFP
  • Pushed OOB behind the spot of catch
    • Forward progress is the spot of catch
    • Clock is not stopped
    • Clock on the RFP
• After the 3-minute warning
  • Pushed OOB further than the spot of catch
    • Forward progress is the spot where the ball crosses the plane of the sideline
    • Clock is stopped when the ball carrier lands OOB
    • Clock on the snap
  • Pushed OOB behind the spot of catch
    • Forward progress is the spot of catch
    • Clock is stopped when the official rules that forward progress was stopped
    • Clock on the RFP

Why would you not give forward progress? What caused the clock to be stopped? (answer that and you have your answer as to when it should be started) You mention there is dissension among your group over how this would be ruled. I'd love to hear the arguements over why the player shouldn't be given forward progress and why the clock shouldn't be stopped.

The way I see it if you are giving forward progress then you are ruling he didn't go OOB prior to making the catch. And if you have forward progress then he didn't go OOB on his own. Say this play happened a yard further in-bounds and after he caught the ball he was driven back and OOB. Would you stop the clock just because he was pushed OOB? If you would then you should stop it in the force-out play. But I say that if you are marking forward progress then you can't also say that the ball became dead OOB.

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?

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.

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.

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.

Bob, I agree with you.

I don't know how you can possibly give someone a forward progress spot and then rule he is also out of bounds. The ball is dead as soon as you rule progress stopped. A ball that is already dead in bounds can't also then be ruled dead out of bounds.
I see that CB 3.4.3C says the clock is stopped because of the out of bounds and not due to foward progress. If that is true, then are they saying the spot becomes where the ball crosses the sideline and not where the hit was made? Because if you are not giving him forward progress then the OOB spot is where you'll have to spot it. What if it's a hit that drives the A player back 2 or 3 or 5 yards? And what if that "loss" causes the line to gain to be missed? Yeah, I'd like to be in on that conversation with the coach.

This topic is brought up as a case play in the 2008 High School Football Book
"Rules by Topic" Rules, Caseplays, Rationales Linked. For those of you that have the book, look on page 133 3.4.3 Situation C describes the following case play.

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 inbounds; therefore, the clock will start with the snap.

You can make a point either way but I suggest looking at Rule 2-15-2...When an airborne player makes a catch, forward progress is the furthest point of advancement after he possesses the ball if contacted by a defender.

A1 is airborne and is contacted by B1. Therefore, his forward progress would be where the initial contact is made. B1 also caused A1 to go out of bounds as he was pushed. Case Book 2.15.1b supports spotting the ball at the point of forward progress.

The question of stopping the clock still remains.

Unlike the NFL, an airborne player who has caught the ball is pushed out of bounds in possession of the ball is treated just like any other player that is pushed out. Therefore, the clock starts on the snap.