Passer over the LOS
 

QB goes past the LOS and completes a pass, seconds after he releases the ball he gets hit hard by a defensive player. Can you have roughing the passer when the passer throws an illegal forward pass. Offsetting fouls?

No, he became a runner when he crossed the line, but you can still have a personal foul.

For NCAA this was a new change for this year. Starting this year it will still be a foul for roughing.

For NFHS, as stated, this cannot be roughing the passer: a passer by definition has thrown a legal forward pass. If you judge it to be a late hit or other personal foul, you could flag that.

If you flag a PF on the defense, yes, the penalties would offset: replay the down.

This is technically not correct. He was a runner all along, since he was a player in possession of the ball. And, at the time of contact, he is NOT in fact a runner, because he did not possess the ball.

He cannot be roughed because by rule he is not a passer. A passer has thrown a legal forward pass. Throwing an illegal forward pass leaves a player unprotected by the roughing provisions.

You are absolutely correct that a late or other illegal hit could still be flagged as a personal foul.

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

Sure it can be. He's a passer and protected until the pass ends or he moves to participate in the play. 2-32-11

I suppose if it was a pass that was in the air for seconds.

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?

Good reason to carry 2 flags.

Canadian Ruling
 

CANADIAN RULING:

Once the passer crosses the LS, he is a ball carrier. If there is a UR, it is just a regular UR, and not UR/Passer.

So no, you cannot have roughing the passer and an IFP in this case.

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

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.

But that assertion was before he quoted that rule.

Uh ... that's what I said.

Yep.

Peace

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.

Bob,

Relax man it is not a big deal. I did say that as a "gotcha" like many try to do on these forums. I simply was pointing out that "seconds" is not the criteria for when a passer stops becoming a passer. You are right that it might realistically be a matter of seconds, but the rule does not use that terminology as apart of the definition.

Peace

And to expound on Rut's answer- that is how misconceptions occur in football rules.

In this case it was my confusion between how "passer" and "kicker" are defined.