forward progress when caught in the air

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

It's not a matter of forward progress. The player who wound up with the ball was never moving forward, so how can he have had forward progress?

So if he wasn't moving forward and can't have forward progress where would you spot the ball? You've said earlier that if he grasps the ball over the EZ but lands outside the EZ at the one, without being pushed out of the EZ by a defender that you're going to give him a TD so how can you say he gets a TD if you can't have forward progress? Forward progress is defined in Rule 2. It's the farthest point of advancement when the runner has possession. Possession is defined in Rule 2. Possession occurs after the ball has been snapped or handed to a player or AFTER they've CAUGHT or recovered it. Notice the word AFTER.

I believe that in that case, the word "caught" is to be read in its natural meaning, rather than the technical meaning as in the definition of "catch".

Where in the rule book does it give you the option of using your own definition?

I could be wrong, but I think Fed was just sloppy in wording it and that my way was the way they meant it.

That's sort of arrogant Robert. The word catch is defined in Rule 2. I don't think I'm going to apply my own definitions to something that's already defined unless I want to spend the rest of my career buried by my association in Pee Wee games.

We had this also with the situation of a player's catching the ball while off the ground and passing it again before touching the ground. If you look at the definition of "pass", that'd seem to be impossible, but it doesn't make much sense unless you ignore the technicality in such a case.

Again, I'm confused as to where you get license to apply your own twists to words which are defined in the book. I hate to preach but whenever a newbie wants to know what to do to become a good official most veterans tell him to learn Rule 2. It seems like you feel entitled to disregard that rule.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by kdf5

Again, I'm confused as to where you get license to apply your own twists to words which are defined in the book.

Because they had to be twisted to make any sense of the play situation in which a player in the air catches and then throws the ball before landing. Do you remember that discussion here? Once that situation is understood to mean, "They must've just neglected to cover situations like that", then I think most of us would want to rule in a way consistent with the unwritten coverage of such situations. Obviously, though, the case book disagrees in the end zone case.

Try this: A ball is passed by A1 and is trapped between A2 and B1 as A2 lands on top of B1; each player has both hands on the ball, but for at least a moment only B1 touches the ground.

I have a simultaneous catch. Do you have a ball dead in sole possession of B1, because only B1 satisfied the definition of "catch" before the pass ended?

Robert