- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Rule book experts, I have a question.........
Posted on 11/9/09 at 1:05 pm
Posted on 11/9/09 at 1:05 pm
Some Bama fans are arguing that Julio touched the pass while he was out of bounds therefore causing the play to be ruled incomplete.
The NCAA rule reads this......
If the player wasnt forced out of bounds, can he touch the ball "in the field of play".........even if the player himself is still out of bounds? Even if he didnt come back on the field, isnt it correct to assume he is still ineligible and therefore cannot touch the ball until AFTER someone from the opposing team does or the ref?
The NCAA rule reads this......
quote:
Eligibility Lost by Going Out of Bounds
ARTICLE 4. No eligible offensive receiver who goes out of bounds during
a down shall touch a legal forward pass in the field of play or end zones or
while airborne until it has been touched by an opponent or official (A.R.
7-3-4-I-III).
Exception: This does not apply to an eligible offensive player who
attempts to return inbounds immediately after being blocked out of bounds
by an opponent (A.R. 7-3-4-IV).
If the player wasnt forced out of bounds, can he touch the ball "in the field of play".........even if the player himself is still out of bounds? Even if he didnt come back on the field, isnt it correct to assume he is still ineligible and therefore cannot touch the ball until AFTER someone from the opposing team does or the ref?
6
Posted on 11/9/09 at 1:06 pm to McChowder
quote:
Some Bama fans are arguing that Julio touched the pass while he was out of bounds therefore causing the play to be ruled incomplete.
and they are fricking retarded.
Posted on 11/9/09 at 1:07 pm to bryso
quote:This.
quote:
Some Bama fans are arguing that Julio touched the pass while he was out of bounds therefore causing the play to be ruled incomplete.
and they are fricking retarded.
Posted on 11/9/09 at 1:09 pm to bryso
knowing definitively that we were screwed will only piss me off more. It's like thinking your girlfriend is cheating on you...asking around, and finding out she is. Your looking for an answer that's only going to piss you off more.
Posted on 11/9/09 at 1:09 pm to McChowder
That rule does not apply to this situtation because Peterson touched the ball the first. Also, if Jones would have touched it first then the rule results in a penalty for "illegal touching" and can be declined by LSU had the interception been called.
Posted on 11/9/09 at 1:20 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Also, if Jones would have touched it first then the rule results in a penalty for "illegal touching"
The Bama fans are arguing that Jones would have to have come back on the field of play for it to be a penalty.
Is it still "illegal touching" because the player is ineligible, even if the player never comes back onto the before touching it?
Posted on 11/9/09 at 4:27 pm to McChowder
quote:
The Bama fans are arguing that Jones would have to have come back on the field of play for it to be a penalty.
They are right. Illegal touching only applies if the player doing the touching has come back onto the field.
Posted on 11/9/09 at 4:34 pm to Jeff
The player has to be 2 things before touching the ball "1st" they have to be forced out and. 2nd have to reestablish them selves back in the field of play. If he runs out on his own the reestablish part is null and void, he can't touch first. Help?
That being said this rule does not apply to this particular situation cause PP touched first
That being said this rule does not apply to this particular situation cause PP touched first
Posted on 11/9/09 at 4:35 pm to McChowder
quote:
Some Bama fans are arguing that Julio touched the pass while he was out of bounds therefore causing the play to be ruled incomplete.
If this were the case, don't you think the SEC would jump all over this convenient excuse to save face? They ruled "incomplete pass," and they are sticking with it.
No Comment
Posted on 11/9/09 at 4:40 pm to McChowder
1. Julio didn't touch the ball. It was a clean catch by Peterson. So this argument is really moot.
2. Even IF Julio DID touch it, it's illegal touching and a 5-yard penalty on Alabama because he didn't re-establish himself on the playing field before touching the ball. That is a penalty. In other words, since he was out of bounds, is is ILLEGAL for him to touch the ball.
3. LSU declines the penalty, Interception stands.
They can try to spin this any way they want, but it was an interception any way you slice it.
2. Even IF Julio DID touch it, it's illegal touching and a 5-yard penalty on Alabama because he didn't re-establish himself on the playing field before touching the ball. That is a penalty. In other words, since he was out of bounds, is is ILLEGAL for him to touch the ball.
3. LSU declines the penalty, Interception stands.
They can try to spin this any way they want, but it was an interception any way you slice it.
This post was edited on 11/9/09 at 4:41 pm
Posted on 11/9/09 at 4:44 pm to McChowder
[quote]Some Bama fans are arguing that Julio touched the pass while he was out of bounds therefore causing the play to be ruled incomplete. [/quote
If a player who steps out of bounds touches a ball that is possessed by another player(teammate or opponent)it has no bearing on the ruling of catch or no catch since the player out of bounds is officially out of the play at that point. In other words Jones' ineligibility does not effect Peterson's eligibility. Hope that helps.
If a player who steps out of bounds touches a ball that is possessed by another player(teammate or opponent)it has no bearing on the ruling of catch or no catch since the player out of bounds is officially out of the play at that point. In other words Jones' ineligibility does not effect Peterson's eligibility. Hope that helps.
Posted on 11/9/09 at 4:45 pm to McChowder
A) This rule doesn't apply in this situation.
B) Even if you were to stretch and try to apply it, nowhere does it say the play is whistled dead because the offensive player touches the ball.
The name of the rule is "eligibility lost" i.e. the receiver becomes ineligible to catch the pass. When JJones steps out of bounds he is no longer in the play. Whatever he did on the sideline is of no consequence.
B) Even if you were to stretch and try to apply it, nowhere does it say the play is whistled dead because the offensive player touches the ball.
The name of the rule is "eligibility lost" i.e. the receiver becomes ineligible to catch the pass. When JJones steps out of bounds he is no longer in the play. Whatever he did on the sideline is of no consequence.
Posted on 11/9/09 at 5:01 pm to JermStone
That is what I would like to know
If by stepping out of bounds makes a reciever ineligible, how then can an ineligible reciever touch the ball first legally? Even if he is still out of bounds, the guy is ineligible to touch a foward pass.
CAN ANYBODY PLEASE HELP ME??
I really dont want to argue about this to a bunch of gumps if im wrong.....and Im man enough to admit im wrong if thats the case. But the longer this discussion with them goes on, the more foolish im going to look if I end up with egg on my face. Help a hommie out!!
--They are arguing that a player must re-enter the field of play for it to be illegal touching.....but the act of going out of bounds makes him ineligible (in or out).
If by stepping out of bounds makes a reciever ineligible, how then can an ineligible reciever touch the ball first legally? Even if he is still out of bounds, the guy is ineligible to touch a foward pass.
CAN ANYBODY PLEASE HELP ME??
I really dont want to argue about this to a bunch of gumps if im wrong.....and Im man enough to admit im wrong if thats the case. But the longer this discussion with them goes on, the more foolish im going to look if I end up with egg on my face. Help a hommie out!!
--They are arguing that a player must re-enter the field of play for it to be illegal touching.....but the act of going out of bounds makes him ineligible (in or out).
Posted on 11/9/09 at 5:05 pm to JTacoma03
quote:
B) Even if you were to stretch and try to apply it, nowhere does it say the play is whistled dead because the offensive player touches the ball.
Actually there is a rule that states if a player that is out of bounds touches a ball, the play is ruled dead or incomplete.
Posted on 11/9/09 at 5:06 pm to McChowder
Mcchowder he would have to come back in and touch first for it to be illegal. If he touches it while out of bounds it's simply an incomplete pass. The penalty occurs when he is back on after going off on his own power and touching first
Posted on 11/9/09 at 5:06 pm to McChowder
Then post that rule. This rule doesn't say that.
Also make sure you're not mistaking "touch" with "catch" in that other rule.
Also make sure you're not mistaking "touch" with "catch" in that other rule.
Posted on 11/9/09 at 5:11 pm to JermStone
quote:
Mcchowder he would have to come back in and touch first for it to be illegal. If he touches it while out of bounds it's simply an incomplete pass. The penalty occurs when he is back on after going off on his own power and touching first
This is thier exact argument. But if stepping out of bounds makes him automatically an ineligible reciever, how can he touch the ball first without getting a flag...........if the ball is "in the field of play" as the rule states? The guy is ruled ineligible while he is out of bounds BECAUSE he is out of bounds.
Posted on 11/9/09 at 5:12 pm to McChowder
McChowder, the receiver is ineligible and cannot be the first player to touch the ball, but all players become eligible when a forward pass touches team B or an official. The penalty for a player that went out of bounds and was the first to touch the ball is a loss of down at the previous spot. Basically it is the same thing as an incomplete pass.
The problem with the gumps assertion that it should have been incomplete because Jones touched the ball while out of bounds is that the ball was in possession of another player. That would be like saying a runner is down because a defender touched him while standing out of bounds.
I hope that helps. I can look in my Rogers Redding study guide if you have any further questions!!
The problem with the gumps assertion that it should have been incomplete because Jones touched the ball while out of bounds is that the ball was in possession of another player. That would be like saying a runner is down because a defender touched him while standing out of bounds.
I hope that helps. I can look in my Rogers Redding study guide if you have any further questions!!
Posted on 11/9/09 at 5:16 pm to duboisd
Page 84, right before their quoted rule. [url=LINK ]
"Held Ball Out of Bounds
ARTICLE 2. A ball in player possession is out of bounds when either the
ball or any part of the ball carrier touches the ground or anything else that is
on or outside a boundary line except another player or game official. "
"Held Ball Out of Bounds
ARTICLE 2. A ball in player possession is out of bounds when either the
ball or any part of the ball carrier touches the ground or anything else that is
on or outside a boundary line except another player or game official. "
Posted on 11/9/09 at 5:16 pm to duboisd
quote:
McChowder, the receiver is ineligible and cannot be the first player to touch the ball, but all players become eligible when a forward pass touches team B or an official. The penalty for a player that went out of bounds and was the first to touch the ball is a loss of down at the previous spot. Basically it is the same thing as an incomplete pass.
The problem with the gumps assertion that it should have been incomplete because Jones touched the ball while out of bounds is that the ball was in possession of another player. That would be like saying a runner is down because a defender touched him while standing out of bounds.
I hope that helps. I can look in my Rogers Redding study guide if you have any further questions!!
Exellent post. Thanks.
I guess the only question I have left is......what if both touched the ball at the same time (or jj touched it right after) and technically PP hadnt yet established possession?
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News