Backward pass

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

But now that all codes limit the play to one forward pass per down, if the pass was caught it might matter whether it was forward, so why not inform other officials of what you saw? And inform the players, too, who could change their actions depending on whether there's a forward pass in the bank.

I do not understand why that would matter at all. I seriously doubt that anyone is watching us at all during those plays that closely, especially the players. And if they do not know how to throw only one forward pass other than the official's assistance, then they need to practice more to execute like they would with other rules that might apply. And I do not need to know what others saw, this play was likely covered in the pre-game with the coach and we were already aware. Also the covering official is not going anywhere; they very likely are going to see both passes.

Peace

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not understand why that would matter at all. I seriously doubt that anyone is watching us at all during those plays that closely, especially the players. And if they do not know how to throw only one forward pass other than the official's assistance, then they need to practice more to execute like they would with other rules that might apply. And I do not need to know what others saw, this play was likely covered in the pre-game with the coach and we were already aware. Also the covering official is not going anywhere; they very likely are going to see both passes.

Peace

I agree with you JRut. Nobody is probably watching you including the other officials. I think the main justification for doing this is when reviewing video. Showing the punch will tell everyone you had a backward pass at the time before you knew there would be a second pass. Without the punch, if you allow the second pass, it could be perceived that you were guessing. That doesn't mean you have to punch it but could help after the fact with selling what you called. If the coaches do happen to notice it when it happens, that's a bonus.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

I agree with you JRut. Nobody is probably watching you including the other officials. I think the main justification for doing this is when reviewing video. Showing the punch will tell everyone you had a backward pass at the time before you knew there would be a second pass. Without the punch, if you allow the second pass, it could be perceived that you were guessing. That doesn't mean you have to punch it but could help after the fact with selling what you called. If the coaches do happen to notice it when it happens, that's a bonus.

What if you punch back and someone on the crew rules the play incomplete? That is much more of a likely scenario than worrying about two passes. Or what if you rule the pass forward and the tape shows it was backward?

I think we worry too much about what someone might think rather than just calling the play as you see it.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

What if you punch back and someone on the crew rules the play incomplete? That is much more of a likely scenario than worrying about two passes. Or what if you rule the pass forward and the tape shows it was backward?

I think we worry too much about what someone might think rather than just calling the play as you see it.

Peace

What if an official throws a bag on a fumble and another official has the runner down? That's more likely and it happens from time to time.

If a wing punches back and another official calls the pass incomplete, than shame on the other official who isn't paying attention. The wing on the side where the pass is thrown (usually) gets to decide whether it's a forward or backward pass. If he punches, it's backwards and the other officials should adjust, no matter what they think.

We *always* punch back in this situation. It immediately alerts *everyone* that the pass is backwards. It's just as important when the pass is caught. A punch back lets everyone know that A could still pass the ball. And, it shows up on film, too.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

What if an official throws a bag on a fumble and another official has the runner down? That's more likely and it happens from time to time.

That happens because guys are so quick to get on the whistle. The play is already dead and if you are not sure you should be ruling anything if the ball is lose. Usually solves that problem.

Originally Posted by RichMSN

If a wing punches back and another official calls the pass incomplete, than shame on the other official who isn't paying attention. The wing on the side where the pass is thrown (usually) gets to decide whether it's a forward or backward pass. If he punches, it's backwards and the other officials should adjust, no matter what they think.

We *always* punch back in this situation. It immediately alerts *everyone* that the pass is backwards. It's just as important when the pass is caught. A punch back lets everyone know that A could still pass the ball. And, it shows up on film, too.

My crew does not punch. We have decided it is really causes more problems than it is worth. The calling official is going to make the decision. If the ball is dead they will hit the whistle. IF the whistle is not blown, the non-calling officials should not be blowing the whistle anyway. Trust your partners to do their job; I do not need to pay attention to them to know to keep officiating. But that is me and what we do. No real right or wrong here, I just am not a fan of the blowing the whistle on plays you are not involved in. Then again we end many plays where there is no whistle.

Peace