Rule differences on spotting?

[4 Sport Official]

Is there a difference in the NFL rules, as opposed to NF, in terms of spotting the ball when the play ends by the runner going out of bounds?

Many of you probably saw the play that I am going to reference. It took place last Sunday Night(11.17.02), in a game between the Oakland Raiders and the New England Patriots. There was a call in the first half, on a third down and short situation, running play. The runner dives for a first down, near the sideline towards the one-yard line, and is horizontal to the ground, as he is pushed out of bounds. He left his feet inbounds, and continued his airborne movement, both towards the goal line, and, at the same time over the sideline. The spot of the ball was significantly short of the line to gain, and was challenged by Oakland. The replay showed that the point of the ball was nearly at the goal line, by the time any part of the runner's body touched the ground out of bounds. I did not see that any other player that was out of bounds was touching the ball. When Ed Hochuli explained his determination to overturn the ruling on the spot of the ball, he said that the ball would be spotted at the one-and-a-half yard line. I do not remember the exact wording, but it was something to the effect that this was where the ball had crossed the vertical plane of the sideline. ??? Why is there a goal line extended, if the ball would be out of bounds when it crosses the vertical plane of the side line?

[bluezebra]

Originally posted by 4 Sport Official

Is there a difference in the NFL rules, as opposed to NF, in terms of spotting the ball when the play ends by the runner going out of bounds?

Many of you probably saw the play that I am going to reference. It took place last Sunday Night(11.17.02), in a game between the Oakland Raiders and the New England Patriots. There was a call in the first half, on a third down and short situation, running play. The runner dives for a first down, near the sideline towards the one-yard line, and is horizontal to the ground, as he is pushed out of bounds. He left his feet inbounds, and continued his airborne movement, both towards the goal line, and, at the same time over the sideline. The spot of the ball was significantly short of the line to gain, and was challenged by Oakland. The replay showed that the point of the ball was nearly at the goal line, by the time any part of the runner's body touched the ground out of bounds. I did not see that any other player that was out of bounds was touching the ball. When Ed Hochuli explained his determination to overturn the ruling on the spot of the ball, he said that the ball would be spotted at the one-and-a-half yard line. I do not remember the exact wording, but it was something to the effect that this was where the ball had crossed the vertical plane of the sideline. ??? Why is there a goal line extended, if the ball would be out of bounds when it crosses the vertical plane of the side line?

The ball isn't out of bounds until the ball carrier is, or it touches someone or something OOB. If he remains inbounds while the ball is OOB, and it breaks the plane of the goal line extended, it's a TD. In the above situation, the ball was marked where IT was when the runner became OOB.

Bob

[Ed Hickland]

Whenever the ball becomes dead it is where the ball was at the time it became dead.

The typical play is when the runner's knee hits the ground. Proper placement of the ball is where it was located, normally forward to the runner, when the knee caused the ball to becoe dead.

NFL and CCA officials are quite good at this because they put distance between themselves and the runner to get a full view of the play.

[mnref]

I saw the play you are talking about. Because the runner was completely airborne, the point of where the ball last crossed the sideline is the correct spot (assuming NFL and NCAA rulings on this are similar). Hochuli made the right call.

Here are two interpretations from the NCAA rulebook that describe the situations (8-2-1-iii and iv on pg FI-46):

III. Runner A1, advancing in the field of play, becomes airborne at the two-yard line. His first contact with the ground is out of bounds three yards beyond the goal line. The ball, in possession of the runner, passed over the pylon. RULING: Touchdown (Rule 4-2-4-e).

IV. The ball, in possession of airborne runner 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 (Rules 2-11-1 and 4-2-4-e).

[4 Sport Official]

Thank you, mnref.

That is what I had taken from Hochuli's fairly thorough explanation. I only felt unsure, because I was unaware of the NFL rule.

Now, I would like to see how anyone interprets the NF rules on this sort of play.


NF 2-40-4 The inbounds spot is the intersection of the inbounds line and the yard line :

c. Through the spot under the foremost point of the ball in possession of a runner when he crosses the plane of the sideline AND GOES OUT OF BOUNDS.

NF 2-28-1 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.

NF 2-28-2 A ball in player possession is out of bounds when the runner or the ball touches anything, other than another player or game official, who is on or outside a sideline or end line.


So, in this case, would you interpret the inbounds spot as, the spot where the BALL crossed the sideline while in possession of an airborne player who ENDS UP out of bounds? or where the ball is at when the PLAYER is out of bounds?

After reading this closely, it sounds to me like it IS the same as the NFL rule, and I was just blissfully ignorant all of this time.

[mikesears]

Originally posted by 4 Sport Official
Thank you, mnref.

That is what I had taken from Hochuli's fairly thorough explanation. I only felt unsure, because I was unaware of the NFL rule.

Now, I would like to see how anyone interprets the NF rules on this sort of play.


NF 2-40-4 The inbounds spot is the intersection of the inbounds line and the yard line :

c. Through the spot under the foremost point of the ball in possession of a runner when he crosses the plane of the sideline AND GOES OUT OF BOUNDS.

NF 2-28-1 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.

NF 2-28-2 A ball in player possession is out of bounds when the runner or the ball touches anything, other than another player or game official, who is on or outside a sideline or end line.


So, in this case, would you interpret the inbounds spot as, the spot where the BALL crossed the sideline while in possession of an airborne player who ENDS UP out of bounds? or where the ball is at when the PLAYER is out of bounds?

After reading this closely, it sounds to me like it IS the same as the NFL rule, and I was just blissfully ignorant all of this time.

I interpret it as the exact same rule as the NFL. I believe either the funny book or casebook covers this play in detail. I know I've seen this play covered at a State Rules meeting.

[4 Sport Official]

You are right. I suppose I should have done some more research on this ruling, first.

NF Case book play 2.25.3

[mikesears]

Originally posted by 4 Sport Official

You are right. I suppose I should have done some more research on this ruling, first.

NF Case book play 2.25.3

The funny book is the Simplified and Illustrated rulebook. It shows pictures and gives explanations of certain rules and/or playes. This year was the first year I bought one and it was well worth the price of $6.00.

[BktBallRef]

Under NF rules, if the ball carrier breaks the goal line plane beyond the sideline, it is a TD if any part of his body is touching inbounds. If he is airborne when this happens, the ball is OOB at the spot where it broke the sideline plane. I believe this is the same principle that Mr. hoculi used in his interpretation.

[JimNayzium]

so if i had state champion long jumper it would not help...i cannot leave the field of play become airborne at say the five yard line.....moving 45 degrees out of bounds....i land with the ball having crossed the sideline at the three but i land five yards deep in the endzone...assuming i could long jump farther than carl lewis...the ball would break the plane of the goaline but not while i was touching in bounds so this ball would be spotted at the three where it crossed the sideline? yes...but do i really need to reach for pylon in NF rules? if my feet are clinging in bounds at the two, and i crossed the plane out of bounds witht hte ball, but my feet where still in at the one and a half, does the ball need to hit or be inside the pylon?

[4 Sport Official]

As I have now come to understand,
if the player still has possession of the ball, while still in contact with the ground in bounds, as you have described, and has not done anything to cause himself or the ball to be out of bounds, then the ball simply needs to cross or touch the goal line or the goal line extended. I had fallen victim the ignorance that has been perpetuated by television commentators. Yes, the goal line extended certainly does continue on around the circumference of the earth, in theory. So having a tremendous leaper would not benefit you in this scenario, but having someone with great body and arm length potentially could provide some small advantage.

[Theisey]

Originally posted by JimNayzium
so if i had state champion long jumper it would not help...i cannot leave the field of play become airborne at say the five yard line.....moving 45 degrees out of bounds....i land with the ball having crossed the sideline at the three but i land five yards deep in the endzone...assuming i could long jump farther than carl lewis...the ball would break the plane of the goaline but not while i was touching in bounds so this ball would be spotted at the three where it crossed the sideline? yes...but do i really need to reach for pylon in NF rules? if my feet are clinging in bounds at the two, and i crossed the plane out of bounds witht hte ball, but my feet where still in at the one and a half, does the ball need to hit or be inside the pylon?

### As soon as a runner goes airborne, the yard line where the ball is spotted is the point at which its forward edge breaks the plane of the sideline.
It is not possible to cross the goal-line extended with an airborne player and have it be a TD.
To be a TD, the player must be in contact with the ground while breaking the plane of the GL-extended.
Both the NCAA and NF codes agree on this principle.

[ABoselli]

I haven't looked it up in the NFL book, but it appears the NFL rule is different in regard to the touching inbounds as opposed to last touching in bounds when the ball breaks the GLE.

Rob Johnson of the Bills made a play last year in KC where he took off for the end zone, leapt in the air at about the 3, was hit as he leapt so he was forced OB, but still had not come down anywhere, and stretched the ball over the GLE. It was originally ruled out at the one, but was changed to a TD after a replay challenge by Buffalo. I forget the R on the game but I remeber his explanation was that he had last touched inbounds, so when the ball crossed the goal line extended, it was a TD.

Go figure.

[4 Sport Official]

I did not see that game, but was that how the referee explained the ruling, or was it "interpreted" by the commentators? It sounds very much like the play in the Raiders/Patriots game, and Ed Hochuli explained the ruling in a way that sounded the same as the NF and NCAA rules.

[ABoselli]

No, that's how it was explained by the R.