Roughing or not Study Group ? #1

[ajmc]

Forgive me if I'm not making myself clear enough. The issue I'm trying to convey is not determining whether the pass was deliberately incompleted or not, becuaue the question STATED that it was thrown at the receivers feet, which would make that a deliberate act.

I agree that it is extremely difficult to make that judgment, as there are numerous factors that may point in a different direction, but if an official does make that judgment (that the pass was intentionally incompleted) it must be a foul.

Under the NFHS code Table 7-5-2-d lists, "A pass intentionally thrown to save yardage or to conserve time is an illegal pass. Other than the unique exception of a passer intentionally throwing the ball forward to the ground immediately after receiving a direct hand to hand snap, to conserve time, a passer can never, legally, intentionally incomplete a forward pass.

Your philosophy about how and why the rules are mutually adjusted to deal with rulings that coaches may be unhappy about may be acceptable in your area, but doesn't apply to such decisions in States I've worked in.

Consistency is always a goal, but the notion that similar plays are always alike and should therefore be called a certain, specific way is at best an illusion.

[The Roamin' Umpire]

Nope, we're good, you're clear. A few years ago, I would have agreed wholeheartedly. My stance has shifted over time - I can't exactly put my finger on why. But I certainly have a sense (possibly obtained from other officials) that there are certain types of judgments that "nobody" wants to see made - especially when there is need to assess intent.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Forgive me if I'm not making myself clear enough. The issue I'm trying to convey is not determining whether the pass was deliberately incompleted or not, becuaue the question STATED that it was thrown at the receivers feet, which would make that a deliberate act.

I agree that it is extremely difficult to make that judgment, as there are numerous factors that may point in a different direction, but if an official does make that judgment (that the pass was intentionally incompleted) it must be a foul.

Under the NFHS code Table 7-5-2-d lists, "A pass intentionally thrown to save yardage or to conserve time is an illegal pass. Other than the unique exception of a passer intentionally throwing the ball forward to the ground immediately after receiving a direct hand to hand snap, to conserve time, a passer can never, legally, intentionally incomplete a forward pass.

Nonsense.

At the receiver's feet, even deliberately, is still throwing it at a receiver. Even if you judge that he threw it at the feet intentionally, that doesn't make it illegal - you don't know with 100% certainty that this pass was thrown to save yards. We've seen QB's throw a pass to a specific spot so it's not picked. There's no way for you to be in this QB's head and KNOW that's not the case here. If the ball HITS his feet and comes up, it can still be caught. You absolutely, unequivocally do NOT have an illegal pass just because it was thrown at feet.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Nonsense.

At the receiver's feet, even deliberately, is still throwing it at a receiver. Even if you judge that he threw it at the feet intentionally, that doesn't make it illegal - you don't know with 100% certainty that this pass was thrown to save yards. We've seen QB's throw a pass to a specific spot so it's not picked. There's no way for you to be in this QB's head and KNOW that's not the case here. If the ball HITS his feet and comes up, it can still be caught. You absolutely, unequivocally do NOT have an illegal pass just because it was thrown at feet.

Let me try, one more time, IF you reach a conclusion that the passer deliberately intended the pass to be incomplete (dumped the pass)- it is a foul, under the NFHS code, for an illegal pass. When you make that judgment, you have no choice but to flag it.

To not flag it, is a disservice to the defensive team who has done their job. If you honestly doubt that the incompletion was intentional, that is an entirely different matter. To judge ANY pass being intentionally thrown to be incomplete not only do you have to look into a passer's head, you often have to see clear through to his soul, but that's your job.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Let me try, one more time, IF you reach a conclusion that the passer deliberately intended the pass to be incomplete (dumped the pass)- it is a foul, under the NFHS code, for an illegal pass. When you make that judgment, you have no choice but to flag it.

To not flag it, is a disservice to the defensive team who has done their job. If you honestly doubt that the incompletion was intentional, that is an entirely different matter. To judge ANY pass being intentionally thrown to be incomplete not only do you have to look into a passer's head, you often have to see clear through to his soul, but that's your job.

My job is to officiate the game based on the spirit and intent of the rules. For me to throw a flag on this play would violate both.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Let me try, one more time, IF you reach a conclusion that the passer deliberately intended the pass to be incomplete (dumped the pass)- it is a foul, under the NFHS code, for an illegal pass. When you make that judgment, you have no choice but to flag it.

Fair enough, and point made. Reading the OP, I don't believe that decision was made at all. "at the feet" is not the same as deliberately intending the pass to be incomplete. the description in the OP is not a foul ... unless there is more here than was posted, or more intended by those words than what he said.

I would add that if a referee were to feel, in his heart, that such a pass is intentionally incomplete, and flagged it as such, then he would likely have his judgement seriously questioned by his superiors.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Fair enough, and point made. Reading the OP, I don't believe that decision was made at all. "at the feet" is not the same as deliberately intending the pass to be incomplete. the description in the OP is not a foul ... unless there is more here than was posted, or more intended by those words than what he said.

I would add that if a referee were to feel, in his heart, that such a pass is intentionally incomplete, and flagged it as such, then he would likely have his judgement seriously questioned by his superiors.

I think the problem is we're trying to relate to a verbal question, rather than something we've actually seen and I hope we're seeing different pictures. Looking back at the original question, the comment is preceeded by "under heavy pressure.....", which, at least to me, suggests the pass was "dumped".

I also believe 'dumping" is a purely judgment call that has to be made EXCLUSIVELY by the referee. He may get help from his wings in situations where a receiver cut a different way, fell down or there were other contributing factors, but the referee has to read dumping directly in, and from, the passer. There is no supervisor I can envision ever being in a position to "seriously question" that judgment.