How hard would be rule possession if order reversed?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I'm not sure I understand, Are you suggesting; a player could leap, from a position in-bounds, to out of-bounds, secure possession of a ball in flight and land as far out of-bounds as possible, and complete a catch? Wouldn't that change the entire perspective of sideline passing?

No doubt it would be a substantive change. I'm just wondering how officials would feel about the difficulty of ruling on it that way vs. the way it is now.

As it stands now, a player touching OOB is considered OOB and subsequent touching of a live ball by that OOB player, kills the ball, so if he completes a catch, he has caught a dead ball.

Not in Fed, if "subsequent" includes jumping off the ground -- unless they changed that and I didn't notice. There was a lot of discussion about that one here.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

No doubt it would be a substantive change.
Not in Fed, if "subsequent" includes jumping off the ground -- unless they changed that and I didn't notice. There was a lot of discussion about that one here.

Wasn't that, rather obvious, notion thoroughly discredited during that extensive discussion. That horse was killed and converted into glue and shouldn't be expected to race ever again.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Wasn't that, rather obvious, notion thoroughly discredited during that extensive discussion. That horse was killed and converted into glue and shouldn't be expected to race ever again.

Unfortunately the horse is still standing on one leg since the rule change a couple years ago only addressed the situation when a player INTENTIONALLY goes out of bounds. If he accidentally steps out, taps or "catches" the ball and throws is backward to a teammate, it's still a legal play. I know you say incomplete based on your own common sense, but that is not supported by rule. The rule change submitted intended to address this situation as well, but I understand that portion was removed because it created another issue. I'm surprised it hasn't resurfaced again. I'm guessing because it's such a rare instance that it isn't a big issue in actual game situations.