Who thinks these two are IG??

[maven]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Part of the rule is the ability of the QB. It has nothing to do with someone being in the area, it has to do with what he is trying to do.

'Ability' is not in the rule, it's a "factor to consider" mentioned in a case play.

7.5.2 SITUATION C:

Quarterback A1 drops back to pass and while under a good defensive rush, he throws the ball forward:

(a) at the feet of two onrushing defensive linemen; or
(b) 15 yards behind A3 who has run a deep post pattern; or
(c) 5 to 10 feet over the head of eligible A3 who lined up near a sideline.

RULING: Illegal forward pass in (a). In (b) and (c), the referee will have to judge whether the pass was intentionally thrown incomplete or whether A1 was simply unable to throw the ball close to A3.

COMMENT: Some factors to look for in making an intentional-grounding decision are absence of eligible offensive receivers in the area and the "dumping" to avoid loss of distance. The ability and skill of the passer and the pressure of the defense are also factors to consider. (7-5-2d)

There are 2 mistakes here:
(1) we should not use "ability" as the primary criterion of IG. The main question, as stated in the COMMENT, is the absence of eligibles and whether the QB is dumping the ball. By those measures, the play in question is IG.
(2) The "ability" question concerns the QB's capacity to play through contact or make a throw while scrambling. In the play in question, ability doesn't enter the matter: there is no contact, and he's clearly dumping the ball. I say "clearly" because the ball goes right where he throws it.

Sure, some of this is judgment. But there's good judgment and bad judgment, and the concepts in play in the rule do not warrant just any call in these cases. IMO, these plays are not borderline.