Bizarre ending should actually have been touchback, right?

[Patton]

Originally Posted by NorCalRef12

I think you're looking at the picture that was posted incorrectly. The picture from earlier in the post shows three pylons, the one all the way on the left is in line with the inbounds marks, the center pylon is at the back corner, and the goal line pylon is all the way on the right.

That picture, plus the REPORT that it was caught 5 yards deep seems is proof enough for me that the crew booted the call. The BJ should have been able to see an R player catching the ball in the EZ.

Since it is clear the receiver did not have 15' arms it should have been easy to rule this as being in the EZ.

NorCal...Don't be so quick to throw these guys under the bus. You should know that reporters frequently "get it wrong".

Take another look at the video and take notice of the shadows on the field. In particular, notice where the officials signal the TD (assuming they're on the GL) and where the receiver fields the ball. I believe he is very close to the GL and probably at the 1-2 yd line. I also agree with others that he throws a backwards pass, not an IFP.

This would have been an extremely difficult play to officiate and virtually impossible to have everyone in a perfect vantage point to rule on everything. That said, I think they got it right. The reporter definetely didn't.

[chymechowder]

question from a HS official in Mass., where a scrimmage kick needs to touch the GROUND on or behind Team B's goal line for it to be a dead ball. (and not having been touched by Team B before hitting the ground.)

you're talking about the field goal attempt becoming dead by rule once it crosses the goal line. is that a special rule just for FG attempts? or does it apply to all srimmage kicks?

(It would seem odd to me that there can be no returns of punts fielded in the endzone). thanks

[Welpe]

chyme, it applies to ALL legal kicks, both scrimmage and free kicks. As soon as the kick breaks the plane of the goal line, the ball is dead and it is a touchback for B.

[whitehat]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

question from a HS official in Mass., where a scrimmage kick needs to touch the GROUND on or behind Team B's goal line for it to be a dead ball. (and not having been touched by Team B before hitting the ground.)

you're talking about the field goal attempt becoming dead by rule once it crosses the goal line. is that a special rule just for FG attempts? or does it apply to all srimmage kicks?

(It would seem odd to me that there can be no returns of punts fielded in the endzone). thanks

If I'm not mistaken Mass and Texas use NCAA rules for football. I am sure Texas does. The rule is different for NF than for NCAA. NF as soon as the ball breaks the plane of the goal line on all kicks entereing R's EZ it is dead.

[NorCalRef12]

Originally Posted by Patton

NorCal...Don't be so quick to throw these guys under the bus. You should know that reporters frequently "get it wrong".

We're on a forum with anonymous screen names, I thought we were supposed to throw people under the bus! If we can't do it here then where can we do it?

In all seriousness though, I looked at where it was caught, right near the end of the shadows, then I looked where the ref was when he signalled TD, also seemed to be in line with the end of the shadows.

So yes, I'm probably guilty of believing the news report that it was kicked 5 yards deep into the EZ. But then again, I'm 3500 miles away and I trust everything that they say on the news!

[JugglingReferee]

Local news coverage.


Video - WCAX.COM Local Vermont News, Weather and Sports-

[JRutledge]

This looks very short actually. The ball carrier only takes a few steps and they are at the 10 yard line. I cannot tell definitively, but the officials were right there and I was not.

Peace

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Local news coverage.


Video - WCAX.COM Local Vermont News, Weather and Sports-

Interesting...this looks like the same video someone else posted on the thread already. But what made me chuckle was, there was a commercial for an insurance company before they showed the video. Maybe the losing team should have bought insurance against kids being stupid and "throwing" the game away. (pun intended here!)