Fumbles on Extra Point Play in NFHS (Chicago story)

[TXMike]

NFHS rules permit someone on Team A other than the fumbler to legally recover a fumble on extra point attempts?

Controversial conversion clinches double-OT victory for Hinsdale Central -- chicagotribune.com

Controversial conversion clinches double-OT victory for Hinsdale Central

Two years ago when he was a sophomore, Hinsdale Central quarterback John Whitelaw used Oak Park's stadium for his coming out party in a 20-point victory.

The return to the scene of the crime Saturday ended in escape.

The No. 6 Red Devils topped Oak Park 46-45 in double-overtime in a West Suburban Silver thriller decided on a controversial ruling on the game's last play.

Hinsdale (4-2, 2-1) fell behind 45-38 when Oak Park's Tony Stapleton (24 carries, 82 yards) plowed in from the 1-yard line on fourth-and-goal to start the second overtime. Three plays later, the Red Devils closed to within one, 45-44, when Jake Knowles scored on third-and-goal from the 1.

The Red Devils opted to go for the two-point conversion and the victory. Whitelaw faked a fullback dive into the Oak Park line and drove to the goal line. As the teams piled up, the ball popped out of the scrum and into the end zone, where Hinsdale junior left tackle Scott McDowell recovered it.

Hinsdale Central players celebrated on their way to the sideline, while Oak Park players and fans called for an illegal forward fumble. After nearly two minutes of discussion, officials raised their arms to signal the conversion was good.

"That was one of those moments where you have to have your head on straight and get that ball," McDowell said. "I was standing over the pile and saw the ball come out. I didn't hear the whistle so I jumped on it. I suppose the refs could have blown the whistle earlier, but I think they made the right decision."

"We ran that play earlier and had good success with it," said Whitelaw, who was 8-for-15 passing for 114 yards and a touchdown and rushed 16 times for 141 yards and two scores. "We came to the strong side of the line and they stuck me up good. As I reached out, the ball popped loose. Thank God (McDowell) was there. I was just hoping my knee wasn't down when I fumbled. I didn't feel like I was down."

The story on the other field was different.

"I tackled Whitelaw about 2 yards from the line, took him down, knees down and everything," said Oak Park junior linebacker Joe Donlan, who had two sacks. "I thought he had the ball, so I thought the game was over. Then I turned around and saw them go crazy. I knew the only thing that could have happened was a fumble in the end zone."

[Theisey]

Originally Posted by TXMike

NFHS rules permit someone on Team A other than the fumbler to legally recover a fumble on extra point attempts?

There are no unique NCAA like fumble rules at all under the NFHS rule book.

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by TXMike

NFHS rules permit someone on Team A other than the fumbler to legally recover a fumble on extra point attempts?

No. Anyone can recover any fumble. Fumbles by A which go out of bounds belong to A where it went out.

[Reffing Rev.]

Originally Posted by LDUB

No. Anyone can recover any fumble. Fumbles by A which go out of bounds belong to A where it went out.

Unless it were to go out of bounds in B's end zone, then it belongs to B at the 20. If the force is still the fumble or any other new force by A then it's a touchback, if the force is a new force by B then it's a safety, either way B's ball at the 20.

Ball out of bounds in A's end zone then A's ball at the 20. A's force then safety and they're kicking from the 20, B's force then touchback and they're snapping from the 20.

So its not quite accurate to say that fumbles by A which go out of bounds belong to A where they went out...You could say fumbles by A which go out of bounds between the goal lines belong to A where it went out.

Sounds like the losing team have been watching too many Sunday afternoons.

[john_faz]

If the Officials judged that the QB intentionally fumbled the ball forward could they have ruled an illegal forward pass? Assuming he was past the LOS.

That would be a loss of down and the game would be over. Any thoughts?

[Bullycon]

Originally Posted by john_faz

If the Officials judged that the QB intentionally fumbled the ball forward could they have ruled an illegal forward pass? Assuming he was past the LOS.

That would be a loss of down and the game would be over. Any thoughts?

Yes, they could have.

Also, regardless of whether it was legal or illegal, if it had been ruled a forward pass, it would have been incomplete. Thus, the try is no good, penalty or no.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by john_faz

If the Officials judged that the QB intentionally fumbled the ball forward could they have ruled an illegal forward pass? Assuming he was past the LOS.

That would be a loss of down and the game would be over. Any thoughts?

The ball looked to be thrown out of the center of the pile. Unless the U or the BJ saw this, there's no way the crew is going to get it.

(And since it hit the ground, it would also be an incomplete pass that would kill the clock and the conversion would be no good.)

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by john_faz

If the Officials judged that the QB intentionally fumbled the ball forward could they have ruled an illegal forward pass? Assuming he was past the LOS.

That would be a loss of down and the game would be over. Any thoughts?

Look at the definitions of "pass" and "fumble". "Fumble" is defined by exclusion, while "pass" has certain criteria. It's apparently possible to fumble intentionally without its being a pass. Has Fed adopted any provision to prevent gain of some sort of advantage in such cases? (Not that I know of, but I'm frequently out of date.)

[kdf5]

A pass is just that - throwing a ball and a forward pass is thrown with its initial direction forward. There is nothing in NF to prevent an intentional fumble or specifies who can or can't recover it. If it's thrown forward illegally then it's incomplete when it hits the ground and if it was an IFP and flagged then the try is over and no replay.

[Forksref]

On a normal scrimmage play we had an illegal forward handoff. The QB was faking a handoff to the running back and this coach teaches that they jointly possess it for a while and the QB then decides if he keeps it or hands it off. Unfortunately, he didn't make his decision until they were both beyond the LOS and the runner was in front of the QB. The handoff was made and we flagged it for illegal handing. 5 yds and LOD enforced under the all-but-one principle.

I don't think I've ever called that or see that before.

[FTVMartin]

If you rule that it was fumbled on purpose you could use the planned loose-ball play rule that prevents an intentional fumble. THat would be hard to call if it comes out of a pile.

[JRutledge]

I saw the angle from the side view (I have connections) and it is much clearer that the ball was knocked out by the runner stretching out and "running" into a teammate in the scrum.

Peace

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by FTVMartin

If you rule that it was fumbled on purpose you could use the planned loose-ball play rule that prevents an intentional fumble. THat would be hard to call if it comes out of a pile.

That doesn't work. It only applies in the vicinity of the snapper.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I saw the angle from the side view (I have connections) and it is much clearer that the ball was knocked out by the runner stretching out and "running" into a teammate in the scrum.

Peace

Which is why I said "it looks like" on the video. It's one angle, from the end zone.

I love watching our crew videos, but since we get one angle I have to consistently remind myself we're not seeing the whole picture.