Incomplete or Illegal Participation?

[insatty]

I am the HL on my crew. This Friday night A89 is wide to my side. On a sprint pattern, A89 goes OB to avoid a block just as A18's pass is thrown to him. A89 jumps in OB territory catches pass in air and lands with feet in-bounds. I bagged the spot where A89 went OB and then killed the play as an incomplete pass on the thinking that this is equivalent to a receiver jumping from in bounds, catching pass, but whose feet first touches OB as incomplete.

I was able to sell this as an incomplete pass since it was last play of first half. But I suspect that I may have incorrectly ruled incomplete when what I really had was a live-ball illegal-participation foul. I can't find definitive guidance in rule or case books. Please help.

[kdf5]

It would be Illegal Participation at the spot he went out (I think, I don't think it's where he comes back in). If you're talking Fed, try Rule 9.

[Theisey]

Do you have a copy of the NF "Simplifed and Illustrated" manual?

See page 84, pictorial 9-6-1.

What you should have had is Illegal Participation on your #89 at the point he returned inbounds. That point is where he landed inbounds after completing the catch of the pass.
Since the foul occurred during a loose ball play, it's a 15 yard previous spot foul.

The play is not dead when the catch is made, so you compounded the problem by technically blowing an inadvertant whistle.
Can't imagine how you could sell this to the rest of the crew as an incomplete pass.

[insatty]

I have looked at the authorities noted in the replies. But those don't appear to definitively answer the question whether A89 made a legal catch when he alights from OB, possesses the ball, and arguably comes down in bounds. I was able to sell my ruling because A89's first-touching foot was right at the sideline. Had A89 had both feet in bounds when he made the catch, then its illegal participation without question. But do I have a catch? If so, then I booted the call.

[BktBallRef]

Yes, you have a catch. When is a player OOB? "A player or other person is out of bounds when any part of the person is touching anything, other than another player or game official, who is on or outside the sideline or end line." This player wasn't OOB when he touched the ball. If he comes down in bounds, the catch is legal.

In basketball, an airborne player is inobunds or OOB, based on where he last touched the floor. The same is not true in football.

[Theisey]

Originally posted by insatty
I have looked at the authorities noted in the replies. But those don't appear to definitively answer the question whether A89 made a legal catch when he alights from OB, possesses the ball, and arguably comes down in bounds. I was able to sell my ruling because A89's first-touching foot was right at the sideline. Had A89 had both feet in bounds when he made the catch, then its illegal participation without question. But do I have a catch? If so, then I booted the call.

### Now your changing the play... Just what happened? Either A89 came down with a foot inbounds or he came down with a foot out-of-bounds. You can't have it both ways.

You only need one foot to touch first in NFHS, so which is it? is that foot IN or OUT of bounds?

[insatty]

For crying out loud Theisey, this is an academic discussion, not a cross-examination. I already know you're smart, now try to be civil (you must be right at home on the baseball forum).

On this rainy, muddy Friday night when the sideline was obliterated, the call could have gone either way. Had I the chance to change my call, I would have ruled him in bounds and flagged for IP. But for discussion sake, assume his foot touches in bounds and give me your non-argumentative conclusion supported by authorities: Legal catch?

[BktBallRef]

If he touches inbounds first, it's a legal catch.

[sportswriter]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
If he touches inbounds first, it's a legal catch.

The guy went out of bounds first, though. That's an issue.

I am not certain of NHFS rules, but going by what I've been taught of Canadian interpretations, if he went out of bounds by his own volition (as was described in the initial post) then there's gotta be nylon flying.

This does, however, bring me to the next question. Under NHFS, can a player re-enter if he/she has been (a) blocked out of bounds, or (b) slid out of bounds while trying to make a tackle. In Canadian, both (a) and (b) allow a player to re-enter.

[4 Sport Official]

For NFHS, anytime a player goes out of bounds INTENTIONALLY, you have illegal participation if that player returns inbounds, during that play.

However, your question does bring up some interesting wrinkles. If the player is blocked out of bounds, they may legally return, but must do so immediately. In the second part of your question, it sounds like a situation where the B player went out of bounds accidentally, while trying to make a tackle. In a play where there is not a change of posession, or prior to a change of posession, if a player of B or R ACCIDENTALLY goes out of bounds, they could return without penalty. The rule only holds A or K players liable for an accidental step out of bounds. Fascinating stuff, eh?

[Theisey]

Originally posted by insatty
For crying out loud Theisey, this is an academic discussion, not a cross-examination. I already know you're smart, now try to be civil (you must be right at home on the baseball forum).

On this rainy, muddy Friday night when the sideline was obliterated, the call could have gone either way. Had I the chance to change my call, I would have ruled him in bounds and flagged for IP. But for discussion sake, assume his foot touches in bounds and give me your non-argumentative conclusion supported by authorities: Legal catch?

### As the judge would say, "overruled counseler".
What's baseball? I hate the sport thanks to our multi-million heir babies and their legal beagles working as their agents.
FYI. the name is Tom if that's OK with you.

Now you are changing the play again with this business of no visible sideline. Under those conditions, any call you made on that night would have been correct.
But your question was answered by several people. I'll repeat. Once OOB on his own, a team-A player cannot return and if he does, it is a flag for IP. Mechanics say drop the bag at that spot. That is proof positive you saw this.
A catch is securing possession and returning to the ground in-bounds or being prevented from returning IB. All that takes is one foot, a toe, a knee, etc. Basic definitions we all have to know. I'm sure you know them.

So, with an obliterated sideline, you did the best you could and said he completed the catch OOB. Therefore no flag. Pass is incomplete. (And that would not matter if it was the last play of the game or the first play).

But for discussion sake, assume his foot touches in bounds and give me your non-argumentative conclusion supported by authorities: Legal catch?
Yes... Legal Catch, a completed pass and a flag for Illegal Participation on Team-A player A89.
I rest my case.

[insatty]

Theisey: The court renders judgment in your favor.

[Theisey]

Well, lets call it a draw and say you did the right thing considering the field conditions.

[ABoselli]

When all else fails, just yell "do over!".