The Interesting NFL Rules Thread (1 Viewer)

[GregR]

A discussion of unusual, little known, contentious, or just plain interesting NFL rules. I'll start a few out including the ruling from tonight's game.

1. Out of bounds player touching loose ball (fumble, forward pass, backward lateral, kick off, punt) causes a dead ball. On a kickoff, this can trigger the penalty for kicking the ball out of bounds. On a pass, an out of bounds defender touching the ball before it is controlled for a completion will cause an incomplete pass.

Relevant rules:

Rule 3, Section 18, Article 3

The Ball is Out of Bounds when:

(a) the runner is out of bounds;

(b) while in player possession, it touches a boundary line or anything other than a player

or an official on or outside such line; or

(c) a loose ball touches a boundary line or anything on or outside such line.

Rule 6, Section 2, Article 3The kicking team may not kick the ball out of bounds or be the last to touch the ball before it goes

out of bounds between the goal lines. If the receiving team is the last to touch the ball before it goes out of

bounds, the receiving team puts the ball in play at the inbounds spot.

Penalty: For a kickoff out of bounds: The receiving team may elect to take possession of the ball 25

yards from the spot of the kick or at the out-of-bounds spot.

(note: edited to the 2011 version of the rule which changes the penalty from 30 yards to 25 to keep the placement at the same spot despite the kickoff being moved 5 yards up.)

Example situation (forward pass): Oakland at San Diego week 10, 2011, at 1:01 in the 3rd quarter. WR Vincent Brown jumps for a pass in the end zone, covered by Lito Shepherd. Brown grabs the ball in the air. Shepherd fights with Brown for the ball as they are both falling to the ground. Shepherd's foot comes down out of bounds during the play. The ball moves in Brown's hands before it ends up in Brown's lap where he then controls it. Initial ruling was a touchdown, but overturned for an out of bounds player touching a loose ball before it was controlled, resulting in a dead ball and an incompletion.

Example situation (kickoff): Team A kicks off to Team B, and the untouched ball stays in bounds, but bounces near the sideline. Returner from Team B puts one foot out of bounds and picks up the ball. While a member of the receiving team touches the ball as it goes out of bounds, they did not touch it before it goes out of bounds as the rules state needs to happen to avoid the penalty. Result, penalty for free kick out of bounds.

2. Kicking team cannot touch a muffed fair catch until the ball hits the ground. A muffed (fumbled) kick can be recovered, even if it is a fair catch. However, the kicking team cannot touch the ball until it has hit the ground or it is a penalty. So if a returner bobbles the ball up into the air, the kicking team have to stay away from it until it touches the ground, after which they could recover it. This used to draw a 15 yard penalty, but it was changed in 2010 to only give possession to the receiving team at the spot of the foul.

Relevant rule:

Rule 10, Section 1, Article 2, Item 3

Item 3: Muff. After a valid fair-catch signal, the opportunity to catch a kick does not

end if the ball is muffed. The player who signaled for a fair catch must have a reasonable

opportunity to catch the muffed ball before it hits the ground without interference

by members of the kicking team, and regardless of whether the ball strikes

another player or an official.

Penalty: For interference with the opportunity to make a fair catch after a

muff: A fair catch is awarded at the spot of the interference even if the ball

is not caught.



Example situation: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d812ea184/article/fisher-faircatch-rule-as-called-vs-titans-doesnt-look-right

3. Fair Catch Kick. A team that makes a fair catch can choose to make a Fair Catch Kick. A Fair Catch Kick is a Field Goal that does not require a snap. The holder can hold the ball at the line of scrimmage where it will be kicked, and the defense has to line up 10 yards from the line of scrimmage, making it less likely they will be able to block the kick. The play is a timed play, but a team who made a fair catch on the final play of a quarter may extend the quarter with a fair catch kick down. So a team who makes a fair catch at the end of a game can try to make a field goal from the spot of the fair catch, even with time expired. The defending team can return a fair catch kick that is short, the same as other field goals.

Relevant rules: Numerous, but especially:

Rule 11, Section 4, Article 3

Fair-Catch Kick. The rules for a field-goal attempt from scrimmage apply to

a field-goal attempt following a Fair Catch (a Fair-Catch Kick).

Exceptions:

(a) The fair-catch kick line for the kicking team is the yard line through the most forward

point from which the ball is kicked.

(b) The fair-catch kick line for the receiving team is the yard line 10 yards in advance of

the kicking team’s fair-catch kick line.

Note: A fair-catch kick is not a free kick. The kicking team cannot get the ball unless it

has first been touched or possessed by the receivers.



Example situation: Video of Neil Rackers shanking a 68 yard Fair Catch Kick

 

[GregR]

Note to self to add the no pass interference out of a punting formation rule.

 

[zed2283]

Rule 6, Section 1, Article 3

The kicking team may not kick the ball out of bounds or be the last to touch

the ball before it goes out of bounds between the goal lines. If the receiving team is the

last to touch the ball before it goes out of bounds, the receiving team puts the ball in

play at the inbounds spot.

Penalty: For a free kick out of bounds: The receiving team may elect to take possession

of the ball 30 yards from the spot of the kick or at the out-of-bounds

spot.

I asked a question about this rule earlier in the year. Is this still the rule? Why doesn't the ball come out to the 35-yard line then? It still comes out to the 40. Someone answered my question and said it was changed so that it still comes out to the 40.

 

[GregR]

Rule 6, Section 1, Article 3

The kicking team may not kick the ball out of bounds or be the last to touch

the ball before it goes out of bounds between the goal lines. If the receiving team is the

last to touch the ball before it goes out of bounds, the receiving team puts the ball in

play at the inbounds spot.

Penalty: For a free kick out of bounds: The receiving team may elect to take possession

of the ball 30 yards from the spot of the kick or at the out-of-bounds

spot.

I asked a question about this rule earlier in the year. Is this still the rule? Why doesn't the ball come out to the 35-yard line then? It still comes out to the 40. Someone answered my question and said it was changed so that it still comes out to the 40.

Sorry about that, I cut and pasted that out of the 2010 rule book as it is easier to search the pdf than it is to find things in the online version. Also I got the Section wrong, it's Section 2.The 2011 version read as follows, I'll update the OP:

FREE KICK OUT OF BOUNDS

Article 3 The kicking team may not kick the ball out of bounds or be the last to touch the ball before it goes

out of bounds between the goal lines. If the receiving team is the last to touch the ball before it goes out of

bounds, the receiving team puts the ball in play at the inbounds spot.

Penalty: For a kickoff out of bounds: The receiving team may elect to take possession of the ball 25

yards from the spot of the kick or at the out-of-bounds spot.

 

[The_Man]

A discussion of unusual, little known, contentious, or just plain interesting NFL rules. I'll start a few out including the ruling from tonight's game.

1. Out of bounds player touching loose ball (fumble, forward pass, backward lateral, kick off, punt) causes a dead ball. On a kickoff, this can trigger the penalty for kicking the ball out of bounds. On a pass, an out of bounds defender touching the ball before it is controlled for a completion will cause an incomplete pass.

Relevant rules:

Rule 3, Section 18, Article 3

The Ball is Out of Bounds when:

(a) the runner is out of bounds;

(b) while in player possession, it touches a boundary line or anything other than a player

or an official on or outside such line; or

(c) a loose ball touches a boundary line or anything on or outside such line.

Rule 6, Section 2, Article 3The kicking team may not kick the ball out of bounds or be the last to touch the ball before it goes

out of bounds between the goal lines. If the receiving team is the last to touch the ball before it goes out of

bounds, the receiving team puts the ball in play at the inbounds spot.

Penalty: For a kickoff out of bounds: The receiving team may elect to take possession of the ball 25

yards from the spot of the kick or at the out-of-bounds spot.

(note: edited to the 2011 version of the rule which changes the penalty from 30 yards to 25 to keep the placement at the same spot despite the kickoff being moved 5 yards up.)

Example situation (kickoff): Team A kicks off to Team B, and the untouched ball stays in bounds, but bounces near the sideline. Returner from Team B puts one foot out of bounds and picks up the ball. While a member of the receiving team touches the ball as it goes out of bounds, they did not touch it before it goes out of bounds as the rules state needs to happen to avoid the penalty. Result, penalty for free kick out of bounds.

I saw this one in a Ravens game a couple of years ago. A high kickoff coming down almost at the pylon. The Ravens returner had one foot on the white and one foot in bounds when he caught the ball and the ref immediately blew his whistle. I almost crapped - thought it would be Ravens ball at the one where the returner fielded it. Instead, they marched it right out to the 40. How many times have you seen guys tightrope the sideline, desperately trying to keep both feet in bounds to field the kick, only to step out after just a few yards and pin their team deep? In reality, the returner in those situations should be stretching like a first baseman, trying to keep one foot on the white while catching the ball - do that, and you're automatically at the 40.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Sorry about that, I cut and pasted that out of the 2010 rule book as it is easier to search the pdf than it is to find things in the online version.

There's a pdf version online.

 

[Chase Stuart]

.

 

[GregR]

4. When the offense is in a punt formation, pass interference and illegal contact penalties on the gunners do not apply. Defensive holding may still be called. If you think about it this is a necessary rule. Without it, you could not block the gunner after five yards or it would be illegal contact and 5 yards and a 1st down... and if you did, the punter could throw the ball his way and pick up a free first down at the spot for pass interference. So even after a punter throws a pass, a defender could run into the gunner/receiver, but he couldn't tackle him, grab him, or pull on his jersey as holding should still be called.

Relevant rules:

Rule 12, Section 1, Article 6

Beyond the five-yard zone, incidental contact may exist between receiver and defender as long as it does not

materially affect or significantly impede the receiver, creating a distinct advantage.

Exception 2: See Rule 8, Section 4, Article 5 for legal and illegal cut blocks.

...

Note 2: Whenever a team presents an apparent punting formation, defensive action that would normally

constitute illegal contact (chuck beyond five yards) will no longer be considered a foul.

Rule 8, Section 5, Article 3

Permissible Acts by both teams while the ball is in the air. Acts that are permissible by a

player include but are not limited to:

...

Note 3: Whenever a team presents an apparent punting formation, defensive acts that normally constitute pass

interference are permitted against the end man on the line of scrimmage, or against an eligible receiver

behind the line of scrimmage who is aligned or in motion more than one yard outside the end man on the

line, provided that the acts do not constitute illegal holding. Defensive holding, such as tackling a receiver,

still can be called and result in a five-yard penalty from the previous spot, if accepted. Offensive pass

interference rules still apply.

Example situation: Week 10 2011, Raiders at Chargers. Punter Shane Lechler throws a deep pass to a Raiders gunner. A Chargers player runs into him, essentially chest bumping him out of bounds but not using his hands in doing so. No flag was thrown, ref explains there is no pass interference when there is an apparent punt formation.

 

[shnikies]

Note to self to add the no pass interference out of a punting formation rule.

I had never heard of that either but it makes complete sense. How can you block a gunner if he might actually be a receiver? I have also never in my life seen a defensive holding "before the punt occurred". Crazy night of football.

 

[B Maverick]

What is the rule on force outs now? I mean since there is no force out...

If D Moore goes up for a pass near the sideline and after the catch and before he lands Jammer catches Moore and carries him out of bounds, is it a catch?

 

[GregR]

What is the rule on force outs now? I mean since there is no force out...

If D Moore goes up for a pass near the sideline and after the catch and before he lands Jammer catches Moore and carries him out of bounds, is it a catch?

Yes, it would be a catch. You're not allowed to carry a person out of bounds. This section was also added when they changed the force out rules:5. You cannot catch a receiver and carry him out of bounds to avoid him getting two feet down. NFL rules used to be that if a receiver would have gotten 2 feet down, but was forced out by a defender, it was still a catch. This was changed, but the NFL covered the possibility of a defender catching a receiver who was making a leaping catch and then carrying him to the sideline:

Relevant rule:

Rule 8 Section 1 Article 3 Item 6:

Item 6: Carried Out of Bounds. If a player, who is in possession of the ball, is held up and carried out of

bounds by an opponent before both feet or any part of his body other than his hands touches the ground

inbounds, it is a completed or intercepted pass.

Example situation: Not aware of it happening in a game yet. Example would be receiver jumps in the air and controls the ball. Defensive player catches him and doesn't let him get two feet down... carrying him to the sideline and dropping him.

 

[GregR]

How does the NFL evaluate officials who make bad calls? The following is from a Mike Pereira chat session.

Supervisors look at every play of every game to make sure that it is officiated correctly. If it is not, the crew gets a crew downgrade and the individual official who is responsible is personally given a downgrade. The performance of the crew and the individual are tracked for the entire season.

The highest performing crews move on to the first two rounds of the playoffs and the highest performing individuals move on to the Championship and Super Bowl games.

The lowest performing individuals are evaluated at the end of the season and if they show consistency in poor performance they will be give extra training or they are let go.

One incorrect call does not mean an official should be reprimanded or fired. Continuous incorrect calls or decisions means that he should.

 

[Reepicheep]

This business about punt formation and pass interference was definitely new to me, but totally makes sense. Good thread.

 

[belljr]

4. When the offense is in a punt formation, pass interference and illegal contact penalties on the gunners do not apply. Defensive holding may still be called. If you think about it this is a necessary rule. Without it, you could not block the gunner after five yards or it would be illegal contact and 5 yards and a 1st down... and if you did, the punter could throw the ball his way and pick up a free first down at the spot for pass interference. So even after a punter throws a pass, a defender could run into the gunner/receiver, but he couldn't tackle him, grab him, or pull on his jersey as holding should still be called.

Relevant rules:

Rule 12, Section 1, Article 6

Beyond the five-yard zone, incidental contact may exist between receiver and defender as long as it does not

materially affect or significantly impede the receiver, creating a distinct advantage.

Exception 2: See Rule 8, Section 4, Article 5 for legal and illegal cut blocks.

...

Note 2: Whenever a team presents an apparent punting formation, defensive action that would normally

constitute illegal contact (chuck beyond five yards) will no longer be considered a foul.

Rule 8, Section 5, Article 3

Permissible Acts by both teams while the ball is in the air. Acts that are permissible by a

player include but are not limited to:

...

Note 3: Whenever a team presents an apparent punting formation, defensive acts that normally constitute pass

interference are permitted against the end man on the line of scrimmage, or against an eligible receiver

behind the line of scrimmage who is aligned or in motion more than one yard outside the end man on the

line, provided that the acts do not constitute illegal holding. Defensive holding, such as tackling a receiver,

still can be called and result in a five-yard penalty from the previous spot, if accepted. Offensive pass

interference rules still apply.

Example situation: Week 10 2011, Raiders at Chargers. Punter Shane Lechler throws a deep pass to a Raiders gunner. A Chargers player runs into him, essentially chest bumping him out of bounds but not using his hands in doing so. No flag was thrown, ref explains there is no pass interference when there is an apparent punt formation.

WHAT ABOUT FG?. Ask the Giants about that 2002-03 Delvin Joyce returned Chandler's short kickoff 32 yards to the 47-yard line. Collins then led them to the 49ers 23-yard line with 6 seconds left. But Junkin botched a snap for a 41-yard field goal attempt, resulting in a feeble pass play that fell incomplete. The Giants were also called for having an illegal man downfield on the play, and the game ended. The following day, it was revealed that the penalized player (guard Rich Seubert) had in fact checked in as an eligible receiver before the field goal attempt, although a different Giant lineman actually was illegally downfield. NFL Vice President of officiating Mike Pereira admitted pass interference also should have been called on 49ers defensive end Chike Okeafor for pulling down Seubert. Had the two right calls been made, the down would have been replayed at the previous spot, the San Francisco 23.

 

[Reepicheep]

Example situation: Video of Neil Rackers attempting a 68 yard Fair Catch Kick

This link should come with a warning about how disappointed you will be when you watch it.

 

[GregR]

Example situation: Video of Neil Rackers attempting a 68 yard Fair Catch Kick

This link should come with a warning about how disappointed you will be when you watch it.

Heh, yeah, the kick was disappointing. Changed "attempting" to "shanking".

 

[GregR]

6. The one point safety. Football fans pretty much all know that safeties are worth two points. However, under certain conditions a safety can be worth only one point. On a PAT after a touchdown (officially a "Try" in the rulebook), if the defense commits a safety then the offensive team is awarded one point instead of two.

Relevant rules:

Rule 11, Section 3, Article 3

Fouls Committed During Try

...

Item 4: Fouls by Team B. The following applies if there is a foul by Team B:

(a) If the foul results in a safety, the offensive team is awarded one point.

So this then brings the question, what defensive penalties could happen on a Try that would result in a safety? For that we go to the rules for safeties.

Relevant rule:

Rule 11, Section 5, Article 1

Safety. It is a Safety:

(a) if the offense commits a foul in its own end zone; or

(b) when an impetus by a team sends the ball behind its own goal line, and the ball is dead in the end

zone in its possession or the ball is out of bounds behind the goal line.

...

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE

The impetus is always attributed to the offense, unless the defense creates a new force that sends the ball behind its own goal line by muffing a ball which is at rest or nearly at rest, or by illegally batting or illegally kicking a ball (3-15-3).

Example situation: You get a 1 point safety if, on a Try after a touchdown, the offense fumbles the ball... the defense illegally bats or kicks the ball behind their goal line... and then the ball either goes out of bounds behind the goal line, or the defense gains possession of the ball in their own end zone. Even if the offense was attempting a 2 point conversion and this happens, they only get 1 point for the safety.

Note that a Try is over if the defense gets possession of the ball. So they could not get possession and fumble it back through their end zone and be a safety, the play would be dead before then. So that just leaves illegal batting to create the defensive safety.

 

[zed2283]

Note to self to add the no pass interference out of a punting formation rule.

I had never heard of that either but it makes complete sense. How can you block a gunner if he might actually be a receiver? I have also never in my life seen a defensive holding "before the punt occurred". Crazy night of football.

This is usually if a D-lineman grabs and pulls an O-lineman to allow someone to shoot the gap to try to block the punt.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

another interesting one from the NE/NYJ game was the one where BB had to use a timeout after a review by the booth in the last 2:00 minutes of the half in order to prevent a 10 second runoff.....even though the reveiw showed that the officials missed the call (think it was the Gronk non fumble), 10 seconds were going to runoff the clock if BB didn't use a timeout.....at the time I remember thinking that really sucked and keeps a team from having that timeout later in the drive.....and what if they didn't have a timeout left......

if the replay reverses the call you wouldn't think the team affected would have to burn a timeout because of an official error......but I'm sure there is some crazy explanantion that makes sense even though a team could really get hosed by this....

I would imagine it would be the same in the last two minutes of the game and I could see that being an issue at some point.....

 

[DevilDog919]

another interesting one from the NE/NYJ game was the one where BB had to use a timeout after a review by the booth in the last 2:00 minutes of the half in order to prevent a 10 second runoff.....even though the reveiw showed that the officials missed the call (think it was the Gronk non fumble), 10 seconds were going to runoff the clock if BB didn't use a timeout.....at the time I remember thinking that really sucked and keeps a team from having that timeout later in the drive.....and what if they didn't have a timeout left......if the replay reverses the call you wouldn't think the team affected would have to burn a timeout because of an official error......but I'm sure there is some crazy explanantion that makes sense even though a team could really get hosed by this....I would imagine it would be the same in the last two minutes of the game and I could see that being an issue at some point.....

Its not a crazy explanation at all. I haven't looked at the official rules on this, but I assume the runoff was only because it was found to be a completed pass. If the runoff didn't happen, then that is basically giving NE a free timeout. The runoff is most likely the average amount of time it takes a team from the end of play to lining up for the next.

 

[da_budman]

The rule I find interesting ( and absolutely hate) is that a ball funbled into the endzone is a touchback and change of posession.

So a player can be taking it to the house, get tackled and fumble the ball out of bounds at the 1 inch line and the team has it first and goal ready to score there....

OR

He fumbles it 1 inch ahead and it crosses the goal line and goes out of bounds. Now its first and 20 and the other teams ball. That is just too harsh of a penalty.

 

[GregR]

another interesting one from the NE/NYJ game was the one where BB had to use a timeout after a review by the booth in the last 2:00 minutes of the half in order to prevent a 10 second runoff.....even though the reveiw showed that the officials missed the call (think it was the Gronk non fumble), 10 seconds were going to runoff the clock if BB didn't use a timeout.....at the time I remember thinking that really sucked and keeps a team from having that timeout later in the drive.....and what if they didn't have a timeout left......

if the replay reverses the call you wouldn't think the team affected would have to burn a timeout because of an official error......but I'm sure there is some crazy explanantion that makes sense even though a team could really get hosed by this....

I would imagine it would be the same in the last two minutes of the game and I could see that being an issue at some point.....

Took awhile but I found it.

7. Inside of 1 minute left in either half, if a replay challenge reverses the ruling, and the clock would not have stopped had the correct ruling been made on the field (whether or not it was stopped with the way it was originally called), a 10 second run off is made, unless a team chooses to take a timeout to avoid it.

Relevant rule:

Rule 4, Section 7, Article 4

If a replay review inside of one minute of either half results in the on-field ruling being reversed and

the correct ruling would not have stopped the game clock, then the officials will run 10 seconds off the

game clock before permitting the ball to be put in play on the ready-for-play signal. All normal rules

regarding 10-second runoffs will apply.

So it looks like this is not some case of applying a general rule and what you end up with is not what you might expect from the rule. This is a case of the NFL specifically considered this exact case and decided this was how they wanted to handle it.

At first glance I was kind of eh about the rule. Though with more thought it does make sense and is consistent. In other situations, if they rule, say, a completion and let the clock run, then reverse the play to an incompletion where the clock should have stopped, they try to get the clock to what it should have been if no mistake had been made, and put the time back on the clock.

So in a case here where the clock should have run, but it didn't because the clock was incorrectly stopped, or a case where the clock did run but the next play didn't proceed normally because of extra stuff in the play (returning a fumble that is ruled down) or the like... they try to get the time back to correct like this. They check when the play should have ended... add a reasonable amount of time for players to get up out of the pile, the ball to be spotted, and the offense to get set and be able to snap it... which they are essentially saying is about 10 seconds.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

thats pretty much what I thought the rationale would be and I guess worse case scenerio is something like this exact same play happening at the end of a game with 9 seconds left and a team out of timeouts.....after review they would be coming back and saying the game is over...

I assume in that sitaution they would review the play to see where the clock was when his knee was down....even so there is usually a lag time between the time the play is over (knee down) and when the official blows the whistle and then even when the clock operator stops the clock after seeing the official kill the clock.....

in the play that actually happened in that game....I do think they moved the clock from 38 back to 42 seconds to account for the time in took for the non fumble and the recovery....

my question also would be....I wonder how this would have been handled had a fumble not been ruled on the play.....would the booth have stopped the game to review it (say with 42 seconds left or with 9 seconds left)....NYJ would not have been able to challenge......and what if NE in that situation was out of timeouts.....

my gut says that if a fumble was not ruled on the field...they would not have reviewed the play....

score, etc probably makes a difference as well....like if the game was tied,etc

 

[GregR]

If the booth thinks something reviewable about the play was wrong, and it is something that could impact the game, then they are supposed to initiate a challenge.

That was the gist of what Pereira said yesterday in a chat on Fox Sports. I'm not sure the nuances of the latter part of that. Most reviews would impact the game, but maybe he's saying if the defense got called for jumping offsides, and the replay booth also spotted 12 men on the field, the booth wouldn't do a review for the too many men on the field since the outcome (offense can accept a 5 yard penalty or take the results of the play) would not change either way. That's just me guessing though.

 

[GregR]

8. What are the rules for completing a catch?

Lots of discussion on this one this week, mainly around going to the ground. I'm going to paste the rules at the bottom of the post and instead focus on a "how you would explain the rules to your girlfriend" description for the most part. I'm not going to go into eligible an ineligible receiver here, but instead will focus on control, 2 feet down, etc.

The rules for completions are pretty much the same everywhere on the field. There is only one exception for end zones which frankly I don't understand how it differs at all from the rest of the rules. I'll discuss that later on.

In general, there are two courses that a complete pass can take. They differ depending on whether the player is "going to the ground" while in the act of making the catch.

1. Player secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to it touching the ground. The ball touching the ground while controlled is ok so long as the ball doesn't move in his grasp significantly.

2. Touches in bounds with either both feet, or any other body part not including his hands.

3. After 1 & 2, he must maintain control of the ball long enough to perform any act common to the game. Long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.

If he completes those three actions before he is going to the ground it is a completion. If he is already going to the ground before all three are completed, then the following additional condition applies:
4. He must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground.

These rules are the same everywhere on the field. A catch in the middle of the field at the 50, a catch dragging your toes at a sideline, and catches going into the end zone or in the end zone all have to meet those same criteria.

How does "breaking the plane" of the end zone fit in with all of this? Simple answer is, it doesn't. Breaking the plane applies to someone who has possession of the ball. A receiver does not have possession of the ball until he fulfills the requirements above. Until he has done so, the ball is considered no differently than a pass in the air or a tipped ball that hasn't been caught yet. It doesn't matter if such a ball crosses the plane. Once the pass is complete, then breaking the plane for our receiver is the same as any other ball carrier.

Example 1:

A receiver controls the ball on the 1 yard line, with 2 feet down, and then turns to run towards the end zone. The turning to advance the ball is his football act, so he has completed the 3 criteria and now has possession. He is no different than a RB who has taken a hand off, and when the ball breaks the plane it is the same as a RB.



Example 2:

Same situation. A receiver controls the ball on the 1 yard line, with 2 feet down. However this time he is falling over backwards towards the goal line as he does so. He is falling before he makes any football act. As the receiver hits the ground he loses the ball. He was "going to the ground" before he completed the 3rd requirement for a catch, so he must complete #4 and maintain control of the ball through the process of going to the ground. Since he doesn't it is an incompletion and he never had possession of the ball at any time during the play. Even though the ball broke the plane, it wasn't a ball possessed by a player so it is not a touchdown.

Example 3:

Our receiver is again at the 1. He catches the ball with 2 feet down. He manages to lunge for the goal line and the ball breaks the plane. While he did go to the ground in making the lunge.... the act of lunging is his football act that completes the 3rd criteria so it is a completion and a touchdown. (This one is an actual example case from the NFL rule book.)

How long do you have to control the ball through hitting the ground? This is one of the contentious points. The famous Calvin Johnson no-catch is the best example. Johnson made a touchdown catch and fell to the ground. He essentially used his momentum from going down to help roll himself towards his feet. While doing so he put the ball on the ground with one hand and it came free. It was ruled an incomplete pass.

The contentious issue is at what point did Calvin Johnson stop "going to the ground". Personally, I think he was right at the borderline. If at the moment the ball came free he had twisted his ankle, I would have said he twisted his ankle going to the ground, not twisted his ankle standing up. Because the bulk of his body's motion was still coming from hitting the ground, even as he was trying to redirect it into standing. The rules basically say when in doubt call it incomplete, so it was probably the right call by the rules even if an unpopular one.

One does not necessarily have to control the ball through every last bit of movement in hitting the ground though. Example would be a play between the Texans and Titans, where a receiver hit the ground in the end zone. He controlled the ball through the main impetus of hitting the ground, rolling over and then just before he stopped moving completely, a defender knocked the ball free. The NFL said the correct ruling was a touchdown because the ball did not come out during going to the ground but was due to "a second act" rather than from going to the ground. I can't point you to an exact rule there, that's more in the instructions the NFL gives their refs on how to interpret what is in the rule book.

Why have the rules this way? It wasn't all that long ago that the rules only called for control and 2 feet. There was no real guidance on how long you needed control. Sometimes a guy would barely get his hands on the ball and have it knocked free and it was called a catch and fumble. Sometimes a player would get control and take a full step and a half and have it come free and it was ruled incomplete.

Fans seemed to live with it because the refs didn't have the luxury of seeing a slow motion replay, so they were doing the best job that they could. Then replay came along, and the calls were still just as inconsistent even with the luxury of seeing the replay. Announcers and fans complained that they couldn't tell what was a catch anymore. There was a bad lack of consistency.

Because of this the NFL put in the requirement for a "football move" to set a duration for how long you had to have control. This helped, but there were incomplete calls that went against conventional wisdom because the player didn't make the football move yet, though he had time he could have. The rule was, I believe, again changed to its current ruling that just requires the player have control long enough they could have made the football act, but doesn't require them to make one. Personally I think this much of the rule is very good as written. It takes a lot of judgment call out of the play and so things tend to be consistent for cases that do not involve going to the ground.

The problem today is that they also put in tnat "going to the ground" rule. This seems to be the biggest point of contention today. A lot of fans judge the play by how long the player controlled the ball, while the rules require control be maintained through the entire act of going to the ground. It might be a good rule change someday to clarify more between a diving player who really should control it through his contact with the ground, versus a player who staggers a step or two in the act of going to the ground, where he maintained control the same length of time required by a player who isn't going to the ground.

Other funky plays:

Can a player hop on one foot twice to count as 2 feet down?

No, the rule requires both feet. There is an example case in the rulebook that shows this as incomplete.

What if one of your 2 feet down is stepping on a player instead of the ground?

Your feet have to touch the ground. If you get 1 foot on the ground, and 1 foot on Albert Haynesworth's chest, then go out of bounds, it is incomplete.

What if you land on another player who is inbounds, then you touch out of bounds before you get 2 feet or 1 other body part in?

Same as the previous one, incomplete. You have to make contact with the ground in bounds yourself, lying on another player doesn't count towards a completion.

Can you get 1 foot and 1 hand down to count as your 2 feet?

No, the rules specifically exclude hands.

Here are the complete rules on completions, followed by that specific end zone rule:

Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass.

A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward

pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:

(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

(c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to

perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it,

advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).

Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball longenough to do so.

Note 2: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of

possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.

If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body other than his hands

to the ground, or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch.

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or

without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting

the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches

the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching

the ground, the pass is complete.

Item 2: Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an

opponent) in the process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous

control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, or the pass is incomplete.

Item 3: End Zone Catches. If a player controls the ball while in the end zone, both feet, or any part of his body

other than his hands, must be completely on the ground before losing control, or the pass is incomplete.

Note: In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, after which contact by a defender

causes the ball to become loose before the runner is down by contact, it is a fumble, and the ball

remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch

beyond the goal line prior to the loss of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.

Item 4: Ball Touches Ground. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control of it, it is a

catch,provided that the player continues to maintain control.

Item 5: Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players

retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an

opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such

players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

Item 6: Carried Out of Bounds. If a player, who is in possession of the ball, is held up and carried out of

bounds by an opponent before both feet or any part of his body other than his hands touches the ground

inbounds, it is a completed or intercepted pass.

So Item 3 is our end zone specific rule. The rule just says that the 2 feet or 1 other body part have to be "completely on the ground" before losing control. I would think that is the case for non-end zone catches too, so I'm really not sure why that rule exists. It could be something that was needed before they redid the rules on completions and it was never removed. I'll try to get it clarified, but if anyone else has ideas what it means I'd love to hear them.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

A discussion of unusual, little known, contentious, or just plain interesting NFL rules. I'll start a few out including the ruling from tonight's game.

1. Out of bounds player touching loose ball (fumble, forward pass, backward lateral, kick off, punt) causes a dead ball. On a kickoff, this can trigger the penalty for kicking the ball out of bounds. On a pass, an out of bounds defender touching the ball before it is controlled for a completion will cause an incomplete pass.

Relevant rules:

Rule 3, Section 18, Article 3

The Ball is Out of Bounds when:

(a) the runner is out of bounds;
(b) while in player possession, it touches a boundary line or anything other than a player
or an official on or outside such line; or
(
c) a loose ball touches a boundary line or anything on or outside such line.
...
...


Example situation (forward pass):

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=311110024Oakland at San Diego week 10, 2011, at 1:01 in the 3rd quarter.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=311110024WR Vincent Brown jumps for a pass in the end zone, covered by Lito Shepherd. Brown grabs the ball in the air. Shepherd fights with Brown for the ball as they are both falling to the ground. Shepherd's foot comes down out of bounds during the play. The ball moves in Brown's hands before it ends up in Brown's lap where he then controls it. Initial ruling was a touchdown, but overturned for an out of bounds player touching a loose ball before it was controlled, resulting in a dead ball and an incompletion.
...

Someone help if this has been covered (I will bow out) but Vince Brown's as-called "incompletion" did not meet the letter of the rule did it?
The rule says, "or anything other than a player... ."
The Oakland DB (out of bounds at the time) is obviously not "anything other than a player."
So that should have been a TD, no?
Has the NFL officially had any follow up on this?

 

[Run It Up]

A discussion of unusual, little known, contentious, or just plain interesting NFL rules. I'll start a few out including the ruling from tonight's game.

1. Out of bounds player touching loose ball (fumble, forward pass, backward lateral, kick off, punt) causes a dead ball. On a kickoff, this can trigger the penalty for kicking the ball out of bounds. On a pass, an out of bounds defender touching the ball before it is controlled for a completion will cause an incomplete pass.

Relevant rules:

Rule 3, Section 18, Article 3

The Ball is Out of Bounds when:

(a) the runner is out of bounds;
(b) while in player possession, it touches a boundary line or anything other than a player
or an official on or outside such line; or
(
c) a loose ball touches a boundary line or anything on or outside such line.
...
...


Example situation (forward pass):

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=311110024Oakland at San Diego week 10, 2011, at 1:01 in the 3rd quarter.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=311110024WR Vincent Brown jumps for a pass in the end zone, covered by Lito Shepherd. Brown grabs the ball in the air. Shepherd fights with Brown for the ball as they are both falling to the ground. Shepherd's foot comes down out of bounds during the play. The ball moves in Brown's hands before it ends up in Brown's lap where he then controls it. Initial ruling was a touchdown, but overturned for an out of bounds player touching a loose ball before it was controlled, resulting in a dead ball and an incompletion.
...

Someone help if this has been covered (I will bow out) but Vince Brown's as-called "incompletion" did not meet the letter of the rule did it?
The rule says, "or anything other than a player... ."
The Oakland DB (out of bounds at the time) is obviously not "anything other than a player."
So that should have been a TD, no?
Has the NFL officially had any follow up on this?

Someone feel free to correct me if im wrong, but I believe the reason it was over turned had absolutely nothing to do with being a complete or incomplete pass, it had to do with before Brown actually caught the ball an out of bounds player touched the ball causing it to be a dead ball and force the end of the play. Which is an entirely separate rule for if an out of bounds player touches a live ball it kills it and the play ends.

 

[Bri]

(Doesn't need a new thread, thought maybe here) Tony G caught the ball, cradled it in his hand like a typical RB, then a defender popped it out. It was ruled incomplete not a fumble. It happened fast, but if you can switch to holding it in one hand you've surely got possession.

The Titans stunk and deserved no breaks. Wouldn't have changed much of anything. I'm just sayin'

 

[GregR]

A discussion of unusual, little known, contentious, or just plain interesting NFL rules. I'll start a few out including the ruling from tonight's game.

1. Out of bounds player touching loose ball (fumble, forward pass, backward lateral, kick off, punt) causes a dead ball. On a kickoff, this can trigger the penalty for kicking the ball out of bounds. On a pass, an out of bounds defender touching the ball before it is controlled for a completion will cause an incomplete pass.

Relevant rules:

Rule 3, Section 18, Article 3

The Ball is Out of Bounds when:

(a) the runner is out of bounds;
(b) while in player possession, it touches a boundary line or anything other than a player
or an official on or outside such line; or
(
c) a loose ball touches a boundary line or anything on or outside such line.
...
...


Example situation (forward pass):

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=311110024Oakland at San Diego week 10, 2011, at 1:01 in the 3rd quarter.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=311110024WR Vincent Brown jumps for a pass in the end zone, covered by Lito Shepherd. Brown grabs the ball in the air. Shepherd fights with Brown for the ball as they are both falling to the ground. Shepherd's foot comes down out of bounds during the play. The ball moves in Brown's hands before it ends up in Brown's lap where he then controls it. Initial ruling was a touchdown, but overturned for an out of bounds player touching a loose ball before it was controlled, resulting in a dead ball and an incompletion.
...

Someone help if this has been covered (I will bow out) but Vince Brown's as-called "incompletion" did not meet the letter of the rule did it?
The rule says, "or anything other than a player... ."
The Oakland DB (out of bounds at the time) is obviously not "anything other than a player."
So that should have been a TD, no?
Has the NFL officially had any follow up on this?

The rule you're quoting in part b) is for while a ball is in someone's possession. So it would apply if you are a running back carrying the ball or a receiver who already completed a catch. In such a case, another player who has a foot out of bounds does not make the ball dead when he touches it in your hands.
But if it is a loose ball, part c) of the rule is the one that applies. That one does not make the exception for an player who is out of bounds.
In Brown's case, the ball was loose, moving about so not under his control, when the ball was touched by the out of bounds player.
So there is a rule that makes the exception you quote, but it doesn't apply to a loose ball which is what Brown's football was at the time.
Which brings up an interesting, different issue. Player A controls a pass with both hands, and gets 1 foot down in bounds. Player B is out of bounds and touches the ball while it is being controlled. Player A then gets a 2nd foot down in bounds and makes his football act.
If you go by the technical wording, the ball was not "in possession" of Player A at the time of the touching, since the reception was not complete yet. But I bet you that the NFL would consider that to still be a live ball, as long as Player A did not lose control. Might be another good question for Pereira.

 

[GregR]

Oh, and I haven't heard of the new head of officials being as public-friendly and clarifying all the calls from previous games. Pereira is still doing it though as part of Fox's broadcast team, and he confirmed the Brown call was correct, it's an incomplete pass.