Progress Stopped, or Play On?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Rich

Maybe it was the ruling in 1942.

No, but you're on the right track. I was thinking of a CFL-specific rule, but I see now the criterion is more specific too, that "he cannot throw the ball". However, the wording I had in mind was much older and not particular to Canadian football but to rugby, concerning the standing tackle.

The criteria I would look for as to where & when the ball becomes dead are:

1. Did the runner stop moving in the direction he seemed to want to go in?

2. Did it become evident that the runner would not be able to break from the tackler's grasp, or would otherwise go down in possession of the ball?

Unless criterion 2 were met, I wouldn't rule that the ballcarrier's progress was "stopped". If criterion 1 were satisfied before criterion 2, then I would rule the ball dead at the place & time where criterion 1 was satisfied.

Meanwhile Fed's wording regarding forward handing, "the yard line where the runner is positioned", seems to assume the runner to be a single point mass! It would be absurd to interpret this on the basis of the foremost point of the runner, for the entire ball could never be ahead of that while in his possession, so what do you go by, his center of mass? Split the distance between his feet?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Meanwhile Fed's wording regarding forward handing, "the yard line where the runner is positioned", seems to assume the runner to be a single point mass! It would be absurd to interpret this on the basis of the foremost point of the runner, for the entire ball could never be ahead of that while in his possession, so what do you go by, his center of mass? Split the distance between his feet?

Sometimes you just have to officiate, Robert!

[APG]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Meanwhile Fed's wording regarding forward handing, "the yard line where the runner is positioned", seems to assume the runner to be a single point mass! It would be absurd to interpret this on the basis of the foremost point of the runner, for the entire ball could never be ahead of that while in his possession, so what do you go by, his center of mass? Split the distance between his feet?

Paralysis by analysis

[bob jenkins]

Most have seen the clip, so why not just remove it and leave the url?

yes, I know some prefer the embedded clips (not me), but in this case ...

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Most have seen the clip, so why not just remove it and leave the url?

yes, I know some prefer the embedded clips (not me), but in this case ...

Thanks for the suggestion. That's what I've done. I've deleted the chatter between moderators that we should've had in the moderator forum.

[bcl1127]

Originally Posted by Welpe

You and I will probably never agree on this. I don't believe in giving the ball carrier a second bite at the apple. Is he held so that his forward progress is stopped? That's what needs to be judged. The rest has no bearing.

I happen to believe he was in this play.

I agree 100%.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Rich

Sometimes you just have to officiate, Robert!

Pretty much. We get paid good money () for our judgment.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by APG

Paralysis by analysis

Well, they have something that purports to distinguish in definition between forward & backward handing, but when you look at it, it doesn't. But they could've. In Rugby Union the equivalent determination would be made under the offside law according to the players' foot position. In NFL the distinction is purported to be regarding the motion given ball by the "passer", but when the ball is handed by one player to another with no air between, then it gets to be like the infamous tuck rule.

[Canned Heat]

I have him stopped....I think the crew got caught by surprise on this one...even though it was 4th and 4 and looked like offense had nothing to lose essentially by pulling the rabbit out of the hat.

Anyone else happen to catch the 3/4 length sleeve officials shirt on the big guy at about 1:17:30? Looks like half officials shirt and half 80's concert t-shirt all in one.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Well, they have something that purports to distinguish in definition between forward & backward handing, but when you look at it, it doesn't. But they could've. In Rugby Union the equivalent determination would be made under the offside law according to the players' foot position. In NFL the distinction is purported to be regarding the motion given ball by the "passer", but when the ball is handed by one player to another with no air between, then it gets to be like the infamous tuck rule.

I'm not sure, nor care what they do in rugby. And I'm not sure what you're trying to claim is the NFL rule nor how it relates to the tuck rule.

NFL:

Rule 3, Section 13, Article 1

(c) A forward handoff occurs when the ball is handed (regardless of the direction of the movement of the ball) to a player who is in advance of a teammate whose hands he takes or receives it.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by APG

I'm not sure, nor care what they do in rugby. And I'm not sure what you're trying to claim is the NFL rule nor how it relates to the tuck rule.

NFL:

Rule 3, Section 13, Article 1

(c) A forward handoff occurs when the ball is handed (regardless of the direction of the movement of the ball) to a player who is in advance of a teammate whose hands he takes or receives it.

D'oh! It was NCAA that in its interpretations used to reference the ball movement that NFL disclaimed. They also specified, "An exchange is legal during a run after team possession changes and the ball is exchanged by teammates while both players are facing each other at less than a 45-degree angle to a sideline. [cross-reference omitted]" They've eliminated both criteria since then.

My point was that rules writers can be more specific in providing for a determination like this regarding handing the ball off, and I see no reason they shouldn't be. In the current case for NCAA & Fed, all they'd need is a definition of the yard line where a player is positioned. However, for ease of administration, I think they could do better than that.

[Line_Judge]

I have him stopped. Once he was stopped and moved back I am killing this, and selling hard. Too many bad things can happen.

Very good discussion.

We had a similar play where progress was stopped and B players rips almost simultaneously, with 94 yds of clear field in front of him. I killed it and sold it it immediately. B coach was not happy with the call and still remembers (and reminds me) to this day.

As mentioned earlier, this crew got caught off guard- always be ready for the unexpected. It is very easy to get comfortable in the flow of a well played game and in the blink of an eye you have something crazy happen!

[Robert Goodman]

How quick a whistle you give in cases like this can have a profound effect on the way the game is played and coached.

In our club in 2010, the officials gave a slow whistle, so I coached techniques to pry the ball loose from opposing ballcarriers, and they worked. Same officials in 2011, but they were giving a quick whistle, so it didn't pay to coach fumble production techniques. Same officials in 2012; whistle this season's still coming faster than in 2010 -- even got an IW after a ball came loose -- but slightly slower than last year. I haven't taught fumble prod'n techniques this year because we've had other priorities.