Forward vs Backward Pass

[Mike L]

Our rule of thumb is it's always forward unless you KNOW it was backward.

[wwcfoa43]

Originally Posted by Mike L

Our rule of thumb is it's always forward unless you KNOW it was backward.

I prefer Sonofanup's description is that if unsure and complete then backward and if unsure and incomplete then forward. This uses the least harm and benefit of doubt principles:

1. If unsure and complete you want to give the offense the benefit of doubt if they decide to then throw a forward pass.

2. If unsure and incomplete you want to give the offense the benefit of the doubt and not have a fumble as a result.

Can seems like a bit of a contradiction but given that we cannot always be sure about our rulings we need to do the least harm when we are not sure.

[Mike L]

I guess that's ok if you want to give all the benefit of the doubt to one team over the other.

[wwcfoa43]

Originally Posted by Mike L

I guess that's ok if you want to give all the benefit of the doubt to one team over the other.

You have to remember that we are talking about cases in which we are not sure what the correct ruling is. In such cases, we try and use the principle of least harm or you could call it least difference.

If a player is near the sideline and we lose track of his feet for a instant we will not call him out of bounds unless we saw him touch out of bounds. In this case the least harm would be to give the benefit of the doubt to the runner.

If a player is near the goal line on a drive we will not award a TD unless we see the player break the plane. If we miss the breaking of the plane then we give the benefit of the doubt to the defense that the player did not break the plane.

If there is a potential block in the back but we missed seeing how the player got to that point then we will pass on throwing the flag and give the player the benefit of the doubt that there actions are legal.

There will be many examples of where we need to err one way or the other if we are not sure what happened. Some will favour the offense and some will favour the defense but I believe that we try to do the least harm with what we did not see or to put it another way, the least difference such as no foul, player still in bounds and no TD.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Mike L

Our rule of thumb is it's always forward unless you KNOW it was backward.

Well, that's great except what happens if one person doesn't know and blows it dead when another crew member is CERTAIN it's backwards.

You can always fix it like this crew did, but you can't undo what becomes an inadvertent whistle.

[wwcfoa43]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Well, that's great except what happens if one person doesn't know and blows it dead when another crew member is CERTAIN it's backwards.

You can always fix it like this crew did, but you can't undo what becomes an inadvertent whistle.

That is where eye contact and perhaps a signal with the other official is crucial. You should only blow these dead when NEITHER if you knows that it was backward.

[ajmc]

It's definitiely something to cover and agree on during the pre-game discussion, but if one official believes a pass to be forward and blows it dead, it shouldn't matter how CERTAIN another official might belive that the pass was backwards. The simple solution is to immediately support your crew mates signal and repeat his incomplete pass signal.

Inadvertent whistle should never come into the equation.

[Sonofanump]

It's just easier to officiate when they catch the ball and don't throw it again.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Sonofanump

It's just easier to officiate when they catch the ball and don't throw it again.

It was easier when the Fed permitted the 2nd forward pass.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ajmc

It's definitiely something to cover and agree on during the pre-game discussion, but if one official believes a pass to be forward and blows it dead, it shouldn't matter how CERTAIN another official might belive that the pass was backwards. The simple solution is to immediately support your crew mates signal and repeat his incomplete pass signal.

Inadvertent whistle should never come into the equation.

My point is that one shouldn't take a guess. If nobody has knowledge, then that's another story. But I've seen one official punch back and another whistle the pass incomplete and the guy with the incomplete call hasn't always been right.

[ajmc]

With all due respect RichMSN this a a hair you should never try and split. Anytime more than one official is involved in any play, there will be different angles, which can provide different perceptions.

In a close, backwards/forward pass situation any combination of either/both wings and the referee have views of the action, and rarely will those views ever be exactly the same. When one, any one, official judges the pass to be forward and declares it so by signalling, the only practical reaction by any other official viewing the play is to support that judgment.

Conceding to another official's judgment, when there is doubt, happens multiple times throughout every game. When there is an encroachment/false start disagreement by opposite wing officials, one of those officials has to defer to the other. When there is a low buttonhook pass that one official sees as being incomplete, that decision takes precedence over perceptions that might have considered it as complete.

Questioning the incomplete signal after the play, or after the game, is fine, but disagreeing with it, except where there is flagrantly obvious reason to do so, is needlessly undermining your fellow officials credibility, and by association, your own and that of your entire crew.

When an incomplete signal and whistle is given, your partner is announcing his final decision, and from wherever you happen to be on the field, your immediate inclination should be to accept and support his judgment.

If one of the other officials has "punched" back, his signal is actually half of an incomplete signal and should be converted the instant he sees his partner's incomplete signal.

The "Inadvertent Whistle" protocol is designed to provide procedures for handling clear and distinct mistakes, not serve as a means to settle differences of opinion or split hairs.