State Championship Call

[bigjohn]

I say his momentum was toward the back of the endzone and the db changed his direction. So 7.5.2k does not fit. Look again, he starts his jump and is going backwards, db hits him FROM THE SIDE and knocks him OOB. When his arms ar up waiting for the ball he is going backwards, pass almost falls short. He catches it in his belly.


COMMENT: When any
receiver is close to the sideline and is contacted by an opponent, the covering
official must make a decision about where he would have landed without the contact.
(4-3-2)


4.3.3 SITUATION B: A has third down and seven yards to gain at B’s 30. A1
leaps near the sideline to catch a pass near B’s 30-yard line. A1 is driven out of
bounds backwards by B2 while making the catch and lands outside the sideline
at B’s 32. RULING: The covering official must make the following decisions: Did
B2’s actions cause A1 to land out of bounds? If the official determines that B2
caused A1 to land out of bounds, then the official must determine forward
progress in the field of play and should not stop the clock. If however, the clock
is stopped, it should start on the ready because forward progress was stopped in
the field of play. If A1 would have landed out of bounds of his own accord, it is
an incomplete pass and the clock should be stopped. COMMENT: When any
receiver is close to the sideline and is contacted by an opponent, the covering
official must make a decision about where he would have landed without the contact.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

I say his momentum was toward the back of the endzone and the db changed his direction.

If you say so but I reserve the right to question your vision.

[jaybird]

Apparently my limited experience doesn't provide me with the eagle eye details you so easily observe, regarding body language, exact and specific positioning on the field (within a step or two), how many degrees his head was turned at any specific moment or the exact state of his vision, as determined by, "his body positioning and moving during the critical part of the play".

That's really a shame because if you possessed those attributes, you could become a football game official. Perhaps with experience you might be able to acquire these qualities you so desperately seek.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by jaybird

That's really a shame because if you possessed those attributes, you could become a football game official. Perhaps with experience you might be able to acquire these qualities you so desperately seek.

That might very well pose a conundrum, because for most of us, the more experience you gain, the better you appreciate and understand that you aren't as smart and all knowing as you think you might be, while you're in the early stages of gaining the experience necessary to really know what you're talking about.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by ajmc

That might very well pose a conundrum, because for most of us, the more experience you gain, the better you appreciate and understand that you aren't as smart and all knowing as you think you might be, while you're in the early stages of gaining the experience necessary to really know what you're talking about.

Alf, do you get paid by the comma?

[JugglingReferee]

If you pause the video with 7 seconds left, you can see first contact, and at this point, the distance from the foot that would have hit inbounds to the sideline is the same (or greater than!) as the distance that same foot hit the ground beyond the sideline in goal.

Simple physics tells us that because there was an external force applied to the airborne path of the receiver, that his foot most definitely would have had a chance (or definitely would have) to hit inbounds.

Good call by the official. This call reminds me of (FJ#80) Gary Gautreaux's call in the SuperBowl. If only this official faced the players to ensure that the receiver maintained contact with the opponent and the ground... it would have been a SuperBowl call.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

If you pause the video with 7 seconds left, you can see first contact, and at this point, the distance from the foot that would have hit inbounds to the sideline is the same (or greater than!) as the distance that same foot hit the ground beyond the sideline in goal.

Simple physics tells us that because there was an external force applied to the airborne path of the receiver, that his foot most definitely would have had a chance (or definitely would have) to hit inbounds.

Good call by the official. This call reminds me of (FJ#80) Gary Gautreaux's call in the SuperBowl. If only this official faced the players to ensure that the receiver maintained contact with the opponent and the ground... it would have been a SuperBowl call.

Are you simply ignoring or missing the fact that if the receiver is already moving in that direction it *doesn't matter* if the receiver would've gotten a foot down? A force out only applies when the direction of the receiver is changed. This is clearly explained in a post above and comes directly from the NFHS case book. What is called in Canada is not really relevant to whether this call is good in Canada or in the NFL.

It's simply an awful call brought about by poor positioning and ball hawking.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Good call by the official. This call reminds me of (FJ#80) Gary Gautreaux's call in the SuperBowl. If only this official faced the players to ensure that the receiver maintained contact with the opponent and the ground... it would have been a SuperBowl call.

Not since the NFL rule change requiring 2 feet inbounds, no matter whether the receiver is pushed out.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Alf, do you get paid by the comma?

Apparently not nearly as much as you must get paid for noticing the inconsequential.

[parepat]

I think the bigger picture is that the force out rule in high school is terrible and needs to be eliminated. It should be the burden of the receiver to catch the ball within the field of play. The NFL and NCAA have recognized this fact and changed their rules. If the "best of the best" aren't expected to split this hair, why are we? Maybe this play will help push the NFHS in that direction.

[BroKen62]

Originally Posted by jaybird

That's really a shame because if you possessed those attributes, you could become a football game official. Perhaps with experience you might be able to acquire these qualities you so desperately seek.

I'm still trying to read his post. Anybody got a dictionary?

[bigjohn]

you seriously think if he doesn't get hit from the side that he does get a foot down in bounds?

Talk about vision problems! It is plain to see the ball is caught in bounds and he is coming down in bounds when he is contacted by the defender. PLAIN AS DAY!

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

you seriously think if he doesn't get hit from the side that he does get a foot down in bounds?

Oh I have no doubt that if he doesn't get hit, he comes down in bounds. But that is completely irrelevant as the airborne receiver's momentum is towards the sideline and that is the direction he was pushed.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Oh I have no doubt that if he doesn't get hit, he comes down in bounds. But that is completely irrelevant as the airborne receiver's momentum is towards the sideline and that is the direction he was pushed.

And just to show how much of a judgment call this is, I have no doubt he would have come down out of bounds anyway without contact. The contact was not that significant. I also agree it's irrelevant for the reason you mention but I did not remember that part of the rule when I was at the game. If I had been that official making the call I would have only applied the judgment of whether he would have landed in or out. At the time I thought out and disagreed with his call but understood it as a judgment call he had to make.