Rule 9-6-4d

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

It's the same with intentional grounding. They could've simply left it at that, but they added qualifiers about the ball's not being thrown in the direction of an eligible receiver. So even if you think it's an intentionally incomplete pass, you don't rule it so if there was some chance to complete it.

Can't agree with you Robert, I think you're reading way too much into your perception of "qualifiers" associated with Intentionally incompleting a forward pass.

The basic sequences is simply that the offense gets the unilateral choice to select what kind of play to run, the defense is given the challenge to counter whatever play the offense selects. Once the offense selects the play, their challenge becomes rejecting the defenses attempts to stop them.

When the defense is successful to the point the offense is totally unable to successfully complete their chosen mode of attack, they are expected to suffer the consequences of being outplayed by the defense, rather than to simply avoid the consequences by "dumping" the pass, which provides them with the unearned advantage of going back to the previous spot for the next play.

The reality is providing an unearned advantage to the offense always saddles the defense with an unearned DISadvantage, which is not our purpose. The responsibility to judge intent rests entirely with the Referee, who may have to "see into the soul of the passer", and the passer's eyes are often the "windows to the soul".

The only question is whether the passer attempted to complete the pass, or deliberately tried to throw it incomplete, for any of several reasons. Crew mates can assist the Referee in pointing out potential receivers who may have; cut the wrong way, slipped on their route or were otherwise legally deterred from their destination, but to allow a "dumping" is simply not fair to the defensive team who has risen to, and accomplished, their challenge.