Help me out on rule interpretation from last week.

[volinSmyrna]

The rules makers provided definition of what it takes to be held for a receiver or interceptor with the last line of the ruling. Keeping the airborne guy with the ball from immediately returning to the ground for a moment. That is why they wrote it down that way.

It is not a foul to do what either defender did, but if they PREVENTED/IMPEDED/HELD a guy who goes airborne and receives a pass the play goes dead when he is for a moment physically prevented from IMMEDIATELY returning to ground at that spot whether he eventually first touches down in or out of bounds. That is expressly what this rule/ruling combo says.

Why don't you quote A.R. 2-4-3 III since you like quoting the rule book so much?

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

But that's not what the rule says. The rule is "HELD"....not prevented or impeded. Our guy was not "held" and carried out of bounds.

Again, there would be no way to coach against that. Every ball on the sideline would be a jump ball in that case. Just go up and get it and the defender has to let you come down. That is insane.

No, wrap him up and complete the tackle inbounds or out of bounds instead of preventing the receiver to return to the ground and life goes on just like always. Keep him off the ground with your methods instead and 7-6-3 III. comes into play. Which is as I posted elsewhere is also in the book under rule 4-3- p.

p. When an airborne pass receiver of either team is held so that they are prevented from immediately returning to the ground (A.R. 7-3-6-III)
You will recognize the referenced ruling.


I did a search on the whole current book and there is no definition of HELD and the uses are varied, i.e. held for kick, a reference to a play where a holding call should have been made, , and the closest one is held for a forward progress call which is the closest to verticle progress call we have been kicking around. So there is no clarification I can find about defining minimum requirements for HELD.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

But that's not what the rule says. The rule is "HELD"....not prevented or impeded. Our guy was not "held" and carried out of bounds.

Again, there would be no way to coach against that. Every ball on the sideline would be a jump ball in that case. Just go up and get it and the defender has to let you come down. That is insane.

The word impeded is not in the book. Unimpeded is 3 times but concerning making a fair catch.

 

[volinSmyrna]

No, wrap him up and complete the tackle inbounds or out of bounds instead of preventing the receiver to return to the ground and life goes on just like always. Keep him off the ground with your methods instead and 7-6-3 III. comes into play. Which is as I posted elsewhere is also in the book under rule 4-3- p.

p. When an airborne pass receiver of either team is held so that they are prevented from immediately returning to the ground (A.R. 7-3-6-III)
You will recognize the referenced ruling.


I did a search on the whole current book and there is no definition of HELD and the uses are varied, i.e. held for kick, a reference to a play where a holding call should have been made, , and the closest one is held for a forward progress call which is the closest to verticle progress call we have been kicking around. So there is no clarification I can find about defining minimum requirements for HELD.

I have described the only way that 7-6-3 comes into play. If the defender catches him in mid-air and doesn't let him come down and carries him out of bounds. The Ball St kid got landed on. He was not "holding" him up. The rule says "IS HELD SO THAT". There is no rational thought that could say that the Ball State kid was "holding" Keyton AND carried him to the sideline. Please quit trying to make something out of nothing. You are Ball State's DC....what do you tell him to do?

 

[volinSmyrna]

The word impeded is not in the book. Unimpeded is 3 times but concerning making a fair catch.

Exactly...and there is a reason for that. Impeding a catch is not illegal. Keyton was impeded from landing....not held and carried out which is what the rule states, so there is no violation.

 

[LouderVol]

I always thought it was different because it's the endzone. Seems the rule is set up similar to a fumble. Offense fumbles and ball goes out of bounds, offense maintain possession where it went out of bounds. Fumble in the endzone and it's a turnover.

Also I believe the plane of the endzone only applies to the front plane, not the sides. I think in the Baylor BYU game a touchdown was overturned because he broke the side plane (doesnt count) and not the front plane(would have counted).

I would also refer everyone to rule 8-6-5. To sumarrize: when in doubt the refs should do everything they can to screw the Vols.

 

[Woodlawn VOL]

Just get your foot in bounds and on defense keep knocking them out of bounds before
they come down inbounds. End of story! GBO!

 

[Firebirdparts]

This is a great example of somebody getting all hung up on a single play that would have benefitted his team and posting the same misinterpretation over and over. Step back and accept that if Tennesssee did this to a Florida receiver, you would not mind. You have to at least go there in your mind to break the cycle.
over the years, I have had some really alarming and disturbing conversations with fans about incomplete passes. Never once was it because they though the team they hate got ripped off. People can be capable of amazing mental hang ups here.
Anyway, the rule requires the defense to carry you from the field of play and I won’t be posting twice in this thread.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

I have described the only way that 7-6-3 comes into play. If the defender catches him in mid-air and doesn't let him come down and carries him out of bounds. The Ball St kid got landed on. He was not "holding" him up. The rule says "IS HELD SO THAT". There is no rational thought that could say that the Ball State kid was "holding" Keyton AND carried him to the sideline. Please quit trying to make something out of nothing. You are Ball State's DC....what do you tell him to do?

Read it again. It explicitly says when a player is not allowed to immediately return to ground, that the play is to be blown dead, ruled a completed pass, whether the player eventually comes down inbounds or out of bounds because it is dead at that yardline.

Also see 4-3 p. about when dead balls should be whistled.
When an airborne pass receiver of either team is held so that they are prevented from immediately returning to the ground (A.R. 7-3-6-III)

So the rulebook has it in there twice with 7-6-3 just parroting the language.

When talking about timing related to these plays, IMMEDIATELY is pretty dang hard to misunderstand. Must have meant it for they could just eliminate that word and still have a complete sentence. IT is in both rules. Do not lift up or carry or otherwise slow an airborne player's return to ground. You are of course free to expedite his return with a tackle.

 

[vik]

Read it again. It explicitly says when a player is not allowed to immediately return to ground, that the play is to be blown dead, ruled a completed pass, whether the player eventually comes down inbounds or out of bounds because it is dead at that yardline.

Wrong rule applied. If you go up and catch a pass, and I, on the other team, catch you before you hit the ground, and wrap you up in a bear hug before your feet touch the ground, and then walk over 10 yards to the nearest sideline and dump you out of bounds before your feet ever touch the ground in bounds, then you apply rule 7-3-6 III.

For what you are asking about, you should apply rule 2-4-3 III, as SmyrnaVol stated above.

Finally, on the page after the table of contents, you will find the following:

I'd respectfully suggest you reach out to that email address for a definitive answer from the actual people who wrote the rules.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Wrong rule applied. If you go up and catch a pass, and I, on the other team, catch you before you hit the ground, and wrap you up in a bear hug before your feet touch the ground, and then walk over 10 yards to the nearest sideline and dump you out of bounds before your feet ever touch the ground in bounds, then you apply rule 7-3-6 III.

For what you are asking about, you should apply rule 2-4-3 III, as SmyrnaVol stated above.

Finally, on the page after the table of contents, you will find the following:
View attachment 489794
I'd respectfully suggest you reach out to that email address for a definitive answer from the actual people who wrote the rules.

I like using the whole book. But the central issue I have is that 7-3-6 III. incorporates 4-3 p. which covers ending the play due to stopping a player who has received a pass while elevated being denied the immediate opportunity to return to the ground, without respect to the OOB lines. In your scenario your bear hug would require stopping the players decent and the rule calls for the play to be blown dead.

I like using the whole book. But why is 4-3 p. not more germane to the issue that I have focused on. In your bear hug strawman this rule requires the play to be blown dead without respect to boundaries once you glob on to the receiver and not let him get immediately to ground. Not hard or complex reading here.

ARTICLE 3. A live ball becomes dead and an official shall sound their whistle or declare it dead:
p. When an airborne pass receiver of either team is held so that they are prevented from immediately returning to the ground (A.R. 7-3-6-III)

It is of course similarly worded in the 7-3-6 ruling as referenced in the rule itself.

The whole basis of my position is that these rules could have been, I think should have been, applied when after the initial two handed shiver to 80, the defender was suspending the receiver on his shoulder long enough for a trail defender to make the significant contact to knock them all out of bounds. Don't see how that could pass the immediately returning test. I will go back and watch the replays again to verify, but my recollection is that during the entire last step of the trailing defender before contact that no part of 80's body was even in motion toward the ground.

Not sure what the original motivations for MY rule and ruling were. Safety maybe? Does not matter. Both are easy reads. Too much study on the term HELD in this thread. But they both eliminate the need of ending up out of bounds to apply them. One does not address it at all. One specifically says it is not a factor. Did the defender make immediate return to the field not possible with his suspension of airborne 80 on his shoulder?

 

[volinSmyrna]

I like using the whole book. But the central issue I have is that 7-3-6 III. incorporates 4-3 p. which covers ending the play due to stopping a player who has received a pass while elevated being denied the immediate opportunity to return to the ground, without respect to the OOB lines. In your scenario your bear hug would require stopping the players decent and the rule calls for the play to be blown dead.

I like using the whole book. But why is 4-3 p. not more germane to the issue that I have focused on. In your bear hug strawman this rule requires the play to be blown dead without respect to boundaries once you glob on to the receiver and not let him get immediately to ground. Not hard or complex reading here.

ARTICLE 3. A live ball becomes dead and an official shall sound their whistle or declare it dead:
p. When an airborne pass receiver of either team is held so that they are prevented from immediately returning to the ground (A.R. 7-3-6-III)

It is of course similarly worded in the 7-3-6 ruling as referenced in the rule itself.

The whole basis of my position is that these rules could have been, I think should have been, applied when after the initial two handed shiver to 80, the defender was suspending the receiver on his shoulder long enough for a trail defender to make the significant contact to knock them all out of bounds. Don't see how that could pass the immediately returning test. I will go back and watch the replays again to verify, but my recollection is that during the entire last step of the trailing defender before contact that no part of 80's body was even in motion toward the ground.

Not sure what the original motivations for MY rule and ruling were. Safety maybe? Does not matter. Both are easy reads. Too much study on the term HELD in this thread. But they both eliminate the need of ending up out of bounds to apply them. One does not address it at all. One specifically says it is not a factor. Did the defender make immediate return to the field not possible with his suspension of airborne 80 on his shoulder?

I like using the whole book - Then why don't you use 2-4-3 III?

This will be my last word on this, because I'm not getting on another 3 week merry-go-round with you. I don't know why you are trying to pound a square peg into a round hole. Basic, common reading comprehension would get you to the right answer, but I think you are just trolling at this point.

"While still in the air, he is tackled by an opponent and obviously held for a moment before being carried in any direction"

That is the rule you keep referring to. Let's walk through it. Was Keyton in the process of being tackled....yes. Was Keyton "obviously held" (for any amount of time).....NO!!!!!! Was he carried out in any direction.....NO. He was pushed out.

Please go back and WATCH THE VIDEO! It was roughly a second from the time Keyton touched the ball until the time he landed out of bounds. Why you keep trying to bang your head on this wall is beyond me. Just like I told you when we were going round and round back in January....find an official and have him explain it to you. There is LITERALLY nobody else on this planet that thinks you are on to something here.

 

[Jaxon_Vol2017]

Jesus fellas let it go lol.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

OK, I have had my say but do want to close with a real response to a couple of folks insertion of 2-4-3 III into the conversation.

III. Airborne A3 receives a pass at Team A’s 40-yard line. While still airborne, he is contacted by B1 and comes to the ground out of bounds with the ball at Team A’s 37-yard line. RULING: Incomplete pass (Rule 7-3-7-a).

GOT it. But 4-3 p. introduces held, and ruling 7-6-3 III introduces tackled and reaffirms held . Not just contact. A different game situation than getting knocked out due to chicken fighting for the ball while elevated.

No question if 80 went out of bounds due to the initial double arm push (see pic in #20) I would not be here, but after that he wraps both arms around the receiver, supports him on his shoulder with his legs buckling from the action (several pics show that), turns him to the boundry and that has to be considered a tackling action. That is a MOMENT in time, with the trailing defender still a few feet away with head upright. Then with the receiver still clearly inbounds D2 lowers his shoulder proceeds to the action and impacts the play driving 80 significantly out of bounds, yet a different moment in time.

Some physics proficient fan can jump in to determine if a defender could close that ground before the receiver would have touched ground if not PREVENTED from immediately returning to ground as specified by the rules I presented. Seems like I remember something about 32 ft per second square, but it has been 50 years. Plenty of pics and copies of the rules in this thread to use.

Over and out....

 

[Volnanza]

OK, I have had my say but do want to close with a real response to a couple of folks insertion of 2-4-3 III into the conversation.

III. Airborne A3 receives a pass at Team A’s 40-yard line. While still airborne, he is contacted by B1 and comes to the ground out of bounds with the ball at Team A’s 37-yard line. RULING: Incomplete pass (Rule 7-3-7-a).

GOT it. But 4-3 p. introduces held, and ruling 7-6-3 III introduces tackled and reaffirms held . Not just contact. A different game situation than getting knocked out due to chicken fighting for the ball while elevated.

No question if 80 went out of bounds due to the initial double arm push (see pic in #20) I would not be here, but after that he wraps both arms around the receiver, supports him on his shoulder with his legs buckling from the action (several pics show that), turns him to the boundry and that has to be considered a tackling action. That is a MOMENT in time, with the trailing defender still a few feet away with head upright. Then with the receiver still clearly inbounds D2 lowers his shoulder proceeds to the action and impacts the play driving 80 significantly out of bounds, yet a different moment in time.

Some physics proficient fan can jump in to determine if a defender could close that ground before the receiver would have touched ground if not PREVENTED from immediately returning to ground as specified by the rules I presented. Seems like I remember something about 32 ft per second square, but it has been 50 years. Plenty of pics and copies of the rules in this thread to use.

Over and out....

I can't recall a time I have ever seen this called. It may be in the book, but I doubt any ref will have the courage to call it. In every game I see receivers' in the air, driven out of bounds for an incomplete pass. I've never seen a play call like that overruled and called complete. I doubt anyone will see one like that this season. If they don't call it, well, it doesn't exist.