lateral

[HLin NC]

Don't feed the trolls.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Sorry Robert, Shakespeare nailed it with, "much ado about nothing". As for, "the foremost point of the body exclusive of the upper extremities", we are talking about a moving body, in the midst of a crowd of other moving bodies, on a wide open field.

leaving, "where the runner is positioned", which hasn't appeared to cause much serious concern for over....a long time, seems a lot more useful

I can't nail down exactly when that wording was put in, but it was around the turn of the century. Not that long a time. So why'd they do it?

if seeing a moving body in a crowd is so hard, surely the same applies to seeing the foremost part of the ball and many other things in the game. But if it adds too much to the burden, I'd be almost as satisfied for them simply to delete the recent definition, and go back to an intuitive understanding of "forward". That was what they had for over a century previous, and I don't know of any problems the lack of a definition caused.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I can't nail down exactly when that wording was put in, but it was around the turn of the century. Not that long a time. So why'd they do it?

if seeing a moving body in a crowd is so hard, surely the same applies to seeing the foremost part of the ball and many other things in the game. But if it adds too much to the burden, I'd be almost as satisfied for them simply to delete the recent definition, and go back to an intuitive understanding of "forward". That was what they had for over a century previous, and I don't know of any problems the lack of a definition caused.

Forgive me Robert, but "forward" referencing, "when the entire ball is BEYOND the yard line...." as opposed to "backwards" referencing, " when any part of the ball is on or BEHIND the yard line...., seems pretty clear, which may contribute to the lack of necessity to enforce violations.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Forgive me Robert, but "forward" referencing, "when the entire ball is BEYOND the yard line...." as opposed to "backwards" referencing, " when any part of the ball is on or BEHIND the yard line...., seems pretty clear, which may contribute to the lack of necessity to enforce violations.

I don't understand. Are you saying the lack of necessity to enforce violations is because the burden of establishing the handing as being forward is difficult because the "yard line" that the hander-off is on is unclear?

BTW, the NFL rule on this references the relative positions of the giver & receiver of the ball, which, while it's not always easy to see at the moment of exchange (mostly because an exchange of possession is always a more gradual event in fact than the instant the rules specify -- which of course is a pretty much unavoidable problem with all ball possession rules), at least has one compare human body to human body rather than body to ball. I suspect officials in Fed & NCAA are actually using a rule in their head like NFL's rather than the letter of Fed's & NCAA's. (NFL also has a possibly superfluous & older provision on the direction of the handoff based on the motion given to the ball by the "passer" -- it's considered a pass -- at the exchange. I suppose it may be possible for a pass to be ruled as forward under this provision even if not under the body-positions provision; it's not clear whether the notwithstanding language they use supersedes it both ways.)

In rugby the comparable ruling is based on the foot positions of the players.

Anyway, let's take a practical example in Fed. A1 takes a handed snap and turns his entire body to face a sideline. A2 comes directly from a line position and "pulls" towards A1, who gives A2 the ball. At the instant the ball is released by A1, the entire ball is ahead of the midline of A1's body, but mostly within A1's frame if you were looking at him from the sideline. A2 on taking the ball moves ahead of A1. Forward handing or not?

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I don't understand. Are you saying the lack of necessity to enforce violations is because the burden of establishing the handing as being forward is difficult because the "yard line" that the hander-off is on is unclear?

In rugby the comparable ruling is based on the foot positions of the players.

Anyway, let's take a practical example in Fed. A1 takes a handed snap and turns his entire body to face a sideline. A2 comes directly from a line position and "pulls" towards A1, who gives A2 the ball. At the instant the ball is released by A1, the entire ball is ahead of the midline of A1's body, but mostly within A1's frame if you were looking at him from the sideline. A2 on taking the ball moves ahead of A1. Forward handing or not?

Robert, this horse is so past dead, it's remains have already been shipped from the glue factory.

When an official AT ANY LEVEL is burdened by determining whether a handoff, subject to penalty, is forward, or not, he should NOT be throwing a flag unless the action is CLEARLY a violation.

Rugby is a wonderful game, played under it's own rules and concerns, and other than a distant historical factor, has nothing to do with (American) football.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Rugby is a wonderful game, played under it's own rules and concerns, and other than a distant historical factor, has nothing to do with (American) football.

When games have similar problems in their administration, they do have something to do with each other. Even sports that seem to have little to do with each other can share situations, like the one that's been discussed in both baseball & football where neither team's players realize the ball's in play.

Same goes in coaching when sports have similar skills.

But why post to say a horse is dead? People will respond to a thread if they're interested, won't if they aren't.