|
Replies: 12
| visibility 1
|
Commissioner [907]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 984
Joined: 10/10/11
|
Can anyone explain the ruling
Dec 30, 2019, 7:53 AM
|
|
by the refs that the freshman wide receiver for OSU caught
a pass at the 5 that was ruled a catch because his hand
was down in-bounds before his foot landed out of bounds.
Let's say a receiver catches a pass down the middle and gets
hit hard enough to put his hand on the ground but still is allowed
to keep running as if he wasn't down. In other words...hand on ground
equals not tackled.
Now the play on the sidelines was called a catch b/c his hand hit the ground first
before his foot was down.
Doesn't that seem to be a contradiction in the rules.
Shouldn't that have been called as he wasn't down also.
I don't get it...can anyone explain what the ruling is by rule?
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [64517]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88956
Joined: 3/27/01
|
The rule states...
Dec 30, 2019, 7:58 AM
|
|
in order for a pass play to be ruled a catch, the receiver must secure control of a live ball in flight before the ball touches the ground, and the player must touch the ground in bounds with any part of his body while maintaining control of the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game.
When the receivers hand touched the ground, that established him in-bounds (not him being down).
When the receivers foot touched out of bounds, that established him as being down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1061]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 1123
Joined: 11/19/19
|
Re: The rule states...
Dec 30, 2019, 8:03 AM
|
|
Yes, the rule for a legal catch and the rule for a runner being down are two different things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83625]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63724
Joined: 12/31/06
|
he wasn’t down when his hand touched...
Dec 30, 2019, 8:01 AM
|
|
He was down after the tackle. The hand established him inbounds prior to the tackle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1915]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 2512
Joined: 6/18/01
|
Foot on the ground isn't tackled either.***
Dec 30, 2019, 8:01 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [733]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 892
Joined: 8/2/11
|
Re: Can anyone explain the ruling
Dec 30, 2019, 8:03 AM
|
|
I saw another poster explain it yesterday (very simply) that made it clear as day for me so I wish I could give credit where it’s due but it’s two separate matters:
Being “down” vs “being in bounds.”
He wasn’t “down” when his hand hit. He simply was establishing himself in bounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mascot [17]
TigerPulse: 50%
Posts: 71
Joined: 12/28/19
|
Re: Can anyone explain the ruling
Dec 30, 2019, 8:13 AM
|
|
I saw another poster explain it yesterday (very simply) that made it clear as day for me so I wish I could give credit where it’s due but it’s two separate matters:
Being “down” vs “being in bounds.”
He wasn’t “down” when his hand hit. He simply was establishing himself in bounds.
Same concept would apply if a receiver's hand touched out-of-bounds prior to his feet touching in-bounds. He'd be ruled out-of-bounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111292]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73650
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: Can anyone explain the ruling
Dec 30, 2019, 8:04 AM
|
|
yes, his hand came down in bounds, so he was in bounds when he caught the pass.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [149]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 204
Joined: 5/22/12
|
Re: Can anyone explain the ruling
Dec 30, 2019, 8:04 AM
|
|
When I first saw that, I thought the same as you. Then I realized that getting the hand down in-bounds was exactly the same thing as getting the foot down in bounds. In both cases, the receiver could advance the ball if his momentum does not carry him out of bounds. In both cases, however, hand or foot down in-bounds establishes position at that spot on the field. My take...someone might have a better explanation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [52103]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8737
Joined: 12/26/15
|
Leaves much to interpetion, HTH
Dec 30, 2019, 8:06 AM
|
|
SECTION 2. Out of Bounds
ARTICLE 1. Player Out of Bounds
A player is out of bounds when any part of his person touches anything, other than another player or game official, on or outside a boundary line (Rule 2-27-15). (A.R. 4-2-1:I and II)
An out-of-bounds player who becomes airborne remains out of bounds until he touches the ground in bounds without simultaneously being out of bounds.
A player who touches a pylon is out of bounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5444]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5194
Joined: 12/3/07
|
The easiest way to think about it is
Dec 30, 2019, 8:07 AM
|
|
His hand touching established him in-bounds, not him being down.
When his foot touched out of bounds, that established him being down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1074]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 998
Joined: 9/22/14
|
Re: The easiest way to think about it is
Dec 30, 2019, 8:18 AM
|
|
ZACKLY
Had his body momentum been N-S and he performed a cartwheel after catching the ball, he would not have been down and it might have made the ESPN Top 10 of the year, not just the week.
*grumble*
Trevor runs like a freight-train/giraffe for 67 yards and only makes #4? More bias.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [60205]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42549
Joined: 11/30/98
|
hand = foot
Dec 30, 2019, 9:44 AM
|
|
pretty elementary.
Touch inbounds first - catch. Touch out of bounds first = no catch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 12
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
