Quick rules question
I'm having trouble finding out how the ball is placed on catches like this.
Lets say that a WR is running towards the sideline on an out route. The ball is thrown, and the WR makes a diving catch on the ball. He has possession of the ball out of bounds, but he drags his feet in bounds. If he dragged his feet in the endzone, it would be a touchdown, but lets say that the ball lands out of bounds at the 30, and his feet are at the 32 when he falls down. The ball is placed at the 32, right? But lets say he is on a hitch route, and he dives towards the QB to make the catch, in bounds. In this case, the ball would be placed at the 30, where it lands (as if it were a run play), correct?
Bonus: on a run, it is only a TD if the ball crosses the goal line, right? So if a RB runs towards the pylon, and gets a foot in the endzone while the ball is out of bounds, is it a touchdown?
I've been watching football for a long time, but these rules still confuse me sometimes. Any help would be appreciated.
The ball is your spot always. Your elbow,knee, and side line only rule u down.
So to pursue go's question: If the ball was out of bounds at the 30 and continued to be out of bounds until the thirty -four, but the running back's foot went out at the 32, the next down starts at the 32.
Where was the ball when he stepped out of bounds at the 32? If the ball was at the 33 when he stepped out of bounds at the 32, the ball should be spotted at the 33 right?
The ball was out of bounds all the way from the 30 to 34. Player's foot went out at 32 with ball still out-of-bounds at the 34.
Then the ball is at the 34 as far as I understand the rule.
Are you talking about a fumble? How would the ball go back four yards while still in the players' possession?
Wherever the ball is when he stepped out should be the spot, unless he fumbled it out of bounds beforehand (in which case it would be spotted wherever it was when it sailed out.)
And butt
You been savin' these up, go16?
EDIT: Nevermind this is good.
for the bonus: yes it's a touchdown. you see it a lot where a RB runs with his body angled just to sneak his feet in while his whole upper body probably doesn't enter the endzone
plus, there's always "pylon-gate" from MSU '08:
But the ball - at least part of it - still has to cross the line. If if never reaches the line, the ball has to be spotted short.
That pylon play was a bad call, because while the ball did cross the line, Minor did not establish possession inbounds. He landed out of bounds. I have no idea how we got that call, especially given that the call on the field was an incompletion.
I'm not sure about where the ball is spotted when the runner advances the ball and stepps out. If the ball carrier is holding the ball in front of him to gain an extra yard I think that counts. You see that sometimes when a QB scrambles. They'll hold the ball out as if to say "look ref I'm crossing the first down line". If he got knocked out at that moment, so that the ball was past the first down line but his feet weren't, I think the ref would give them the first down.
Side lines are not like the goal line. If the player has possesion the ball is not out of bounds until the player is out of bounds. Once the player is out of bounds the ball is spoted, as stated previously, at the location of the ball.
If he has the ball in his hands for even a split-second over the goal line, it's a TD. If the ball never reaches the goal line, by definition it shouldn't be a touchdown. The rule itself is not that complicated. The bigger problem is the "indisputable visual evidence" required to overturn it if the referees call it a TD. A lot of these kinds of plays are too close to overturn.
The ball would be spotted where the ball was on the catch, not his feet, even if the receivers feet are in the endzone and ball is out of bounds on the 1 inch line. No it would not be a TD on the running question. The ball and the ball only must touch or cross even the slightest bit of the white line on the end zone. Even if it is only " just the tip just for a second"!
Just to see how it feels?
It depends ... are we at home or in Lansing? Not enough info provided in these scenarios. lol.
But on most out-of-bounds running plays, it's just convenient to place the ball at the spot where the runner's foot went out. It's also pretty accurate (the ball will usually be pretty close vertically to the lead foot), so it serves as a pretty good proxy. The only time anyone notices/cares is when there is a goal line/first down line at issue, in which case they'll place the ball at the proper spot if they do any sort of review.
Does this seem to anyone else like it has the makings of the "48 / 2 (3+9)= ??" thread?
The answer is quite obviously 2
... please excuse my dick and sack ... at least thats how I remembered it.
Bonus: on a run, it is only a TD if the ball crosses the goal line, right? So if a RB runs towards the pylon, and gets a foot in the endzone while the ball is out of bounds, is it a touchdown?
No, for starters