Passer over the LOS

[HLin NC]

And a deep post pattern wouldn't be in the air a few seconds? A sideline out route off the opposite hash?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

And a deep post pattern wouldn't be in the air a few seconds? A sideline out route off the opposite hash?

Who said it couldn't?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

If it was seconds after he released the ball, it can't be roughing the passer. It could be unnecessary roughness on general principles.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Who said it couldn't?

Your comments are suggesting that after a few seconds is what would be the determining factor of being able to call RTP. That is why mbyron referenced 2-32-11 in response to your comments.

Peace

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Your comments are suggesting that after a few seconds is what would be the determining factor of being able to call RTP. That is why mbyron referenced 2-32-11 in response to your comments.

Duh, my comments were before 2-32-11 was referenced. If my comment was in response to mbyron's, then you could say it was suggesting that.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Duh, my comments were before 2-32-11 was referenced. If my comment was in response to mbyron's, then you could say it was suggesting that.

Much backward read?

No... you said, "If it was seconds after he released the ball, it can't be roughing the passer." implying that "seconds" is the determining factor... which it's not. That's why mb quoted the correct rule - to contradict your incorrect assertion.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Much backward read?

No... you said, "If it was seconds after he released the ball, it can't be roughing the passer." implying that "seconds" is the determining factor... which it's not. That's why mb quoted the correct rule - to contradict your incorrect assertion.

But that assertion was before he quoted that rule.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

But that assertion was before he quoted that rule.

Uh ... that's what I said.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Duh, my comments were before 2-32-11 was referenced. If my comment was in response to mbyron's, then you could say it was suggesting that.

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

No... you said, "If it was seconds after he released the ball, it can't be roughing the passer." implying that "seconds" is the determining factor... which it's not. That's why mb quoted the correct rule - to contradict your incorrect assertion.

Yep.

Peace

[Robert Goodman]

What am I missing here? If he'd posted that and then in response I'd written that it couldn't be as much as seconds, then you could say I didn't think the ball could be in the air for seconds. But since he wrote this after I wrote that, I'm not saying the ball couldn't be in the air for seconds.