Sort of. When it hits the pylon, it is out of bounds... but what matters is whether it had already crossed the goal line in bounds v. going out of bounds before crossing the goal line... hence the sides of the pylon mattering.

And that is what I'm saying. In practice, it does not matter, it will always be considered a touchdown. I will see what I can dig up in support.

But that's NOT what I'm saying. It is not always a touchdown in practice. If it hits the front of the pylon, it is not a touchdown - this is why you see players diving and reaching the ball around the inside part - to score. If you hit the front, you did not score.

Understand first of all that I know nothing about NCAA, I'm talking strictly FED here, but according to the interpretations I've seen, when a ball in player possession touches the pylon on either side or front, the ruling is touchdown - the ball has either broken the plane of the endzone proper or the goal line extended. There is nothing to suggest that the ball cannot enter the enzone from the side instead of the front. Example, a player dives for the EZ, and after having last touched IB, is over OOB beyond the goal line, reaches out and touches the ball down inside the EZ from the side - is this not a TD? If so, what would make touching the pylon from the side any different?

What I am saying is that this is incorrect based upon interpretation.

I believe this also applies to any other touching of the pylon like on a kick or a player touches the pylon in some other way that it is considered in the end zone. I have never heard that the side someone or something touches matters.

Peace

And I'm talking NCAA. (In the scenario you mention, no, it's not a TD in NCAA)

You work both, so I'm assuming you're talking FED here. In NCAA, the other touchings you mention do not have the same rules as a ballcarrier crossing out of bounds near the goal line - there is a separate rule for that entirely, and that rule is the crux of the discussion. For anyone else, the pylon is simply part of OOB - you would rule on the play exactly as if the person touching the pylon was touching the ground.

Based upon what interpretation?

4.2.4.e: When a ball carrier dives or jumps toward the sideline and is airborn as he crosses the sideline, forward progress is determined by the position of the ball as it crosses the sideline.

AR 8-2-1-IV: The ball, in posession of airborne ball carrier A21, crosses the sideline above the one-yard line, penetrates the plane of the goal line extended, and is then declared dead out of bounds in possession of A21. RULING: Ball is declared out of bounds at the one-yard line.

If you hit the front of the pylon, the ball has already gone OOB - and should be spotted where it went OOB. If you hit the side of the pylon, the ball has already gone into the endzone IN bounds - and is a TD.

That is what I will work on digging up. :)

Logically though it makes sense to me because the pylon is at the intersection of the sideline and the goaline. By rule, a loose ball that hits the pylon is considered out of bounds behind the goal line which tells me that if a ball hits a pylon, at least part of it crossed over the goal line.

What I am talking about once you hit the pylon whatever touches the pylon is in the end zone and out of bounds. Never can remember any reference or any talk where the touching takes place. Of course there are differences slightly for a ball carrier then other things as it matters when you touch the pylon and sometimes who, but the sides I have never heard matters. My point is this should be a TD no matter what side the runner touched the pylon with the ball while they were airborne. Again I would have to see a rules reference to suggest otherwise.

Peace

Yes, but this is only true because the rule regarding a loose ball does not have the OOB rule that a ball carrier does. A loose ball is not OOB when it's airborne until it hits something (player (unairborne, of course), pylon, ground, non-player, chain, etc) and an airborne looseball can be "saved" for lack of a better word.

I quoted you the rule and the AR. If the ball hits the front, then it HAS to have gone out of bounds first.

(Consider ... if this is wrong, why would players be trying to keep the ball in bounds as they approach the pylon in the air? You see this all the time.)

I don't know that these situations are really all that different though. Consider this, a loose ball (other than a forward pass or forward fumble) that goes out of bounds will be spotted at the point where it crosses the sideline, not where it eventually strikes something that causes it to be out of bounds.

Say you have a punt that bounces and crosses the sideline at the B-3 and due to an unusual circumstance (wind, funny spin, etc), the ball comes back and strikes the pylon on the outward face of the pylon. You are going to have a touchback by rule, even though the ball crossed the sideline at the B-3.

Now we look at a situation where an airborne ball carrier extends the ball across the sideline and touches the same face on the pylon with the ball. Does it stand to reason that this situation is treated the same, that the ball crosses the goal line itself?

I think it does.

You just contradicted yourself. You say the loose ball is out of bounds at the spot where it went out of bounds and then illustrate with a case where it isn't. You're right, this is a touchback, by rule, even though it crossed the sideline at the B3. The rules for a grounded loose ball are not the same as for a ball in the arms of a ballcarrier. (Note that an UNgrounded punt also has a special rule to apply so that it does get marked where it went out of bounds).

No. There is a SPECIFIC rule for a ball carried by a ball carrier (posted above). These 2 cases are by definition treated differently.

But if I were to try to convince you, I'd only repeat myself. I've posted the rule and the AR. If an official were to rule that a ball in possession of the ball carrier that struck the front of the pylon was a TD, in a game where review was possible, it would be overturned.