TD or NO TD

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ajmc

In Texas (and Massachusettes) you follow a single code for both interscholastic and collegiate football, so I can appreciate your concern about consistency, but fortunately (or if some prefer, unfortunately) there are differences in the codes applied to interscholastic and collegiate football in the other 48 States, and officials are required (whether they choose to consider them, or not) to deal with the complications of "differences".

Sometimes "differences" really don't matter all that much, then again, sometimes they actually do.

The states set the real interpretations more so than the NF in the first place. So each of those 48 states might tell their officials something slightly different than the other. None of us work directly for the NF and in some cases we do not play dues to the NF, so what the NF says only can take you so far if your state decides to do something different. And if you do not believe me, look at the uniform rule in basketball where my state decided with the BOD for the IHSA to basically change the rule or change how that rule was enforced because of all the problems uniforms were being handled previously. There was almost a darn revolt if everyone went by the NF rules. And this case, I can tell you that our state is just fine with the philosophy to survive the ground or hit. I would not be so sure what is required by states outside of Texas and Mass.

Peace

[BktBallRef]

Personally, I don't think it's the intent of the NFHS Rules Committee to apply NCAA rules to NFHS plays. If it were, the NFHS would adopt the NCAA ruling on this play. Until they do, I have a catch and a touchdown in NFHS play.

[Robert Goodman]

I find it funny in anybody's code that a player has to do more to complete a catch while falling than while just running, especially when it's already harder to catch a ball while falling, and most especially considering that inexperienced players may put arms out to break their fall (foolishly because that can lead to injury).

For those using the "survive the ground" code or interpret'n, does it also apply to a player crashing into a goal support? If a teammate in the end zone catches the receiver (who already has the ball) to prevent his falling to the ground or hitting the goal post, is that helping the runner?

I can see using "survive the ground" as a guideline to judgment for otherwise unclear cases, but not a hard & fast rule unless it explicitly is a rule in the code you're using.

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

For those using the "survive the ground" code or interpret'n, does it also apply to a player crashing into a goal support?

Yes.

If a teammate in the end zone catches the receiver (who already has the ball) to prevent his falling to the ground or hitting the goal post, is that helping the runner?

No. Read rule 9-1.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I find it funny in anybody's code that a player has to do more to complete a catch while falling than while just running, especially when it's already harder to catch a ball while falling, and most especially considering that inexperienced players may put arms out to break their fall (foolishly because that can lead to injury).

For those using the "survive the ground" code or interpret'n, does it also apply to a player crashing into a goal support? If a teammate in the end zone catches the receiver (who already has the ball) to prevent his falling to the ground or hitting the goal post, is that helping the runner?

I can see using "survive the ground" as a guideline to judgment for otherwise unclear cases, but not a hard & fast rule unless it explicitly is a rule in the code you're using.

This is where the consistency gets really nice. If a receiver catches the pass and gets hit immediately causing the ball to come out, it's incomplete. If he crashes into the goal support immediately after catching the ball, it's incomplete. If the goal support is well behind the end line he may have had a few steps before hitting it. Then it would be complete. If he goes to the ground a few steps after catching it, then it's complete. The more you understand the concept and the more plays you watch, the more this philosophy makes it so much easier to make a call and the more consistent your decisions will be.

This is also not about being consistent between the different levels. We are borrowing something from them that has made their rulings be more consistent. It fits within the wording and spirit of the rule.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

This is where the consistency gets really nice. If a receiver catches the pass and gets hit immediately causing the ball to come out, it's incomplete. If he crashes into the goal support immediately after catching the ball, it's incomplete. If the goal support is well behind the end line he may have had a few steps before hitting it. Then it would be complete. If he goes to the ground a few steps after catching it, then it's complete.

So then the action of falling is not the be-all & end-all of defining an interval in which the player must retain control of the ball. A few steps is sufficient even if the player is falling while stepping (and at the end of that fall hits the ground or a goal support).

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

So then the action of falling is not the be-all & end-all of defining an interval in which the player must retain control of the ball. A few steps is sufficient even if the player is falling while stepping (and at the end of that fall hits the ground or a goal support).

If he's going to the ground in the process of completing the catch, then he must maintain possession even if there are a couple steps. That's a pretty rare combination and there could be some judgement involved. After watching a few plays it becomes much easier to identify this action.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

so what the NF says only can take you so far if your state decides to do something different. And if you do not believe me, look at the uniform rule in basketball.... I can tell you that our state is just fine with the philosophy to survive the ground or hit. I would not be so sure what is required by states outside of Texas and Mass. Peace

I'm in total agreement with what you suggest, accept that I don't work basketball, so I don't pay a lot of attention to what basketball rules, or officials, decide is appropriate for THEIR sport, as well those decisions may be.

State Associations absolutely make decisions about requirements, procedures and interpretations that apply WITHIN their State, and it's smart to abide by those decisions when working WITHIN those States. ("When in Rome, do as a Roman" - BUT that doesn't automatically mean that whatever Romans decide, applies OUTSIDE Rome.)

I'm no where near sure, " what is required by States outside Texas or Mass", but in NYS, unless and until NYS has decided to do something different, NFHS Rules apply as written, just as NCAA rules apply to collegiate level games. DIFFERENT doesn't necessarily mean there has to be a "Right and Wrong". Different just means DIFFERENT.

What works well for NCAA, or NFL may work equally as well for NFHS, then again that's up to the NFHS, or the individual governing board within each NFHS State, to decide when (or if) to adopt practices or "philosophies" accepted by other governing bodies.

Following the instructions, policies and decisions of YOUR State governing board is sound advice, but until MY State decides to agree with those decisions, I hope you'll understand, I'm doing my best to follow that same "sound advice".

[Cliffdweller]

Play nice guys....
This is a play I would have to see, it could go either way, I'm betting most NFHS officials would call incomplete.
That being said, "possession of a live ball in the opponents end zone is always a touchdown". I say based on "securely gaining possession" it's a TD.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I'm in total agreement with what you suggest, accept that I don't work basketball, so I don't pay a lot of attention to what basketball rules, or officials, decide is appropriate for THEIR sport, as well those decisions may be.

State Associations absolutely make decisions about requirements, procedures and interpretations that apply WITHIN their State, and it's smart to abide by those decisions when working WITHIN those States. ("When in Rome, do as a Roman" - BUT that doesn't automatically mean that whatever Romans decide, applies OUTSIDE Rome.)

I'm no where near sure, " what is required by States outside Texas or Mass", but in NYS, unless and until NYS has decided to do something different, NFHS Rules apply as written, just as NCAA rules apply to collegiate level games. DIFFERENT doesn't necessarily mean there has to be a "Right and Wrong". Different just means DIFFERENT.

What works well for NCAA, or NFL may work equally as well for NFHS, then again that's up to the NFHS, or the individual governing board within each NFHS State, to decide when (or if) to adopt practices or "philosophies" accepted by other governing bodies.

Following the instructions, policies and decisions of YOUR State governing board is sound advice, but until MY State decides to agree with those decisions, I hope you'll understand, I'm doing my best to follow that same "sound advice".

If you are doing something your state wants or suggests, that is fine with me. My point is that many people try to assume that everyone that is a NF member (states) agrees on every interpretation or philosophy. Better yet, I do not know of a policy or interpretation that really contradicts with the philosophy of surviving the ground or hit to acknowledge a catch. I have yet to see anything that says that is in appropriate for the NF level. Even the targeting and defenseless player stuff that we have talked about, my state took a different position than what a current NF committee member was saying about the current rules and interpretation. The NF will not even answer most rules or interpretation questions from officials directly, they ask the individuals to contact their state organization for clarification. If that is the case, then what do you think is going to take place if people adhere to this philosophy? Obviously nothing as I have been using this for years and never had anyone complain about a call or situation where I used this philosophy or my crew used this philosophy. And we worked the highest of levels and one of the calls took place in a state final. Never heard the state come up and say, "That was an incorrect application of the rules." Trust me, I was waiting for that to take place in my situation and it never happened.

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Better yet, I do not know of a policy or interpretation that really contradicts with the philosophy of surviving the ground or hit to acknowledge a catch. I have yet to see anything that says that is in appropriate for the NF level.

Seems to me from this discussion and others on this subject, 47 of the 48 states using NFHS rules agree with you, Jeff. And 31 of 32 districs in NY do as well. And 73 of the 74 fields in ajmc's area do as well... the exception being the field that ajmc is on.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Seems to me from this discussion and others on this subject, 47 of the 48 states using NFHS rules agree with you, Jeff. And 31 of 32 districs in NY do as well. And 73 of the 74 fields in ajmc's area do as well... the exception being the field that ajmc is on.

Wow, I haven't contacted anywhere near 47 States, who operate under the NFHS code, didn't realize there are 32 districts in NYS (thought it was 18) and don't believe there are 74 football fields in our section, actually schools have been consolidating, but thanks for the update.

By any chance would you happen to have something worthwhile or of actual value, to share related to this subject?