Toe or entire foot?

[rbmartin]

Baseball umpire with a silly football question. Seen this a couple of times recently.

College rules although question applies to NFL also (just 2 feet instead of 1).

A reciever posesses the ball in the air with back toward the sideline. The reciever's toe clearly touches in bounds first. Then the heel of same foot comes down on the sideline.

In bounds or out?

[JRutledge]

The entire foot.

Out of bounds.

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

It's only the toe if the toe is the only part that comes down. It's whatever part(s) of the foot contact the ground.

[Robert Goodman]

NCAA 2-4-3(a)-1 says "inbounds with any part of his body", so that's a catch. It's NFL that still has the foot provision; 3-2-7 says "both feet completely on the ground inbounds", so no possession there.

[Welpe]

This is incomplete in NCAA.

NCAA AR 7-3-6 XV

Eligible A80 is airborne near the sideline when he receives a legal forward pass. As he comes to the ground facing the field of play, his
toe (a) clearly drags the ground inbounds before he falls out of bounds; (b) touches the ground inbounds and then his heel comes down on
the sideline in a continuous motion. He maintains firm control of the ball in both cases.

RULING: (a) Complete pass. (b) Incomplete pass. The continuous toe-heel touching is part of a single process and by interpretation he has landed out of bounds, thus not executing a catch.

[HLin NC]

Ah, the great NCAA heel-toe debate.

[Texas Aggie]

If you can find a replay of the A&M/Alabama game, there's a real good example of a toe-heel reception. In that case, it was an interception (or rather, would have been), but the defender was (correctly) ruled OOB and it was upheld on replay. Second half, I think early 4th Quarter.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Welpe

This is incomplete in NCAA.

NCAA AR 7-3-6 XV

Eligible A80 is airborne near the sideline when he receives a legal forward pass. As he comes to the ground facing the field of play, his
toe (a) clearly drags the ground inbounds before he falls out of bounds; (b) touches the ground inbounds and then his heel comes down on
the sideline in a continuous motion. He maintains firm control of the ball in both cases.

RULING: (a) Complete pass. (b) Incomplete pass. The continuous toe-heel touching is part of a single process and by interpretation he has landed out of bounds, thus not executing a catch.

This is one of those approved rulings that seems to have no cx to the rule, nor to any logic I understand! The dragging of the toe (which surely was eventually followed by the player's taking a normal stance, and out of bounds to [heh] boot), is not just as much part of a single process? I guess this is one of those things the sec'y must've answered a question about one day cursorily, and they put it in the book while never bothering to conform the rule to it or it to the rule.

[JugglingReferee]

Incomplete in Canada.