Backward pass

[stegenref]

On those plays where a quarterback stands straight up and throws immediately to a WR who turns towards him...I know if it's definitely backwards you're supposed to punch back to show the white hat it was a backwards pass. On a forward pass you don't do anything. But what if the pass is straight sideways and parallel with the line of scrimmage? Is that considered a forward or backward pass?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by stegenref

On those plays where a quarterback stands straight up and throws immediately to a WR who turns towards him...I know if it's definitely backwards you're supposed to punch back to show the white hat it was a backwards pass. On a forward pass you don't do anything. But what if the pass is straight sideways and parallel with the line of scrimmage? Is that considered a forward or backward pass?

There's no such thing. But if you don't KNOW it's backward, then it's forward.

[ppaltice]

Originally Posted by stegenref

On those plays where a quarterback stands straight up and throws immediately to a WR who turns towards him...I know if it's definitely backwards you're supposed to punch back to show the white hat it was a backwards pass. On a forward pass you don't do anything. But what if the pass is straight sideways and parallel with the line of scrimmage? Is that considered a forward or backward pass?

If it is parallel with the LOS, it is backward in NFHS (2-31-5). In NCAA, it depends on where it hits (ground, player, etc).

As Mike said, if in doubt, it is forward. But if you know it was parallel or towards the player's goal line, it is backward.

[john_faz]

Which Wing official is suppoed to "punch" back? The one that the pass is towards or the other one?

What happens if one punches and the other doesn't? Mixed signals can cause trouble and I would argue that no one should be "punching" back.

Any thoughts?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by stegenref

On those plays where a quarterback stands straight up and throws immediately to a WR who turns towards him...I know if it's definitely backwards you're supposed to punch back to show the white hat it was a backwards pass. On a forward pass you don't do anything. But what if the pass is straight sideways and parallel with the line of scrimmage? Is that considered a forward or backward pass?

stegenref, any pass that is not forward is considered backwards. So "straight sideways and parallel" is backwards.

When ruling on such a pass that's incomplete, if there's any doubt, it's forwards.

[JRutledge]

"Punching back" is not what you are "supposed to do." There are people that might feel that is the way to go, but there are others that feel like that is not the way to go. In this specific play I see no need to "punch back" at all as the calling official should make a decision on the spot. If the ball hits the ground and it is forward blow it dead like you normally would. If the ball is backwards, then keep the play going. No other officials should be doing anything if they are not sure the status of the ball.

Peace

[golfnref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

stegenref, any pass that is not forward is considered backwards. So "straight sideways and parallel" is backwards.

When ruling on such a pass that's incomplete, if there's any doubt, it's backwards.

My philosophy is, "when in doubt it is forward not backwards".

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by stegenref

On those plays where a quarterback stands straight up and throws immediately to a WR who turns towards him...I know if it's definitely backwards you're supposed to punch back to show the white hat it was a backwards pass. On a forward pass you don't do anything. But what if the pass is straight sideways and parallel with the line of scrimmage? Is that considered a forward or backward pass?

CANADIAN MECHANIC:

Punching by the side guy with the ball is permitted.

CANADIAN PHILOSOPHY:

When in doubt, it's incomplete.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

"Punching back" is not what you are "supposed to do." There are people that might feel that is the way to go, but there are others that feel like that is not the way to go. In this specific play I see no need to "punch back" at all as the calling official should make a decision on the spot. If the ball hits the ground and it is forward blow it dead like you normally would. If the ball is backwards, then keep the play going.

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.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by golfnref

My philosophy is, "when in doubt it is forward not backwards".

Just a typo, golf.

[ODJ]

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.

Tossing a flag on the 2nd Fwd pass will relay the news. Ball's not dead, keep working.

[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.