• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Out of bounds rule

B

Bubble Boy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
4,808
Reaction score
448
If I am not mistaken, the rule in college is that once a receiver goes out of bounds, the only way he can catch the ball is if was pushed out by a defender and comes back in bounds as soon as possible.

On Clemson's 3rd TD, the TE's feet were clearly out of bounds before he went up on his toes to catch the ball. I just replayed the play, and Okoro was 2-3 steps behind him, so he was definitely not pushed out of bounds. That means that not only should it NOT have been a TD; it should have been a penalty for illegal touching,, which would have put Clemson in a 3rd and goal from around the 20.

What really pisses me off is that the play was reviewed in the booth. What the hell are these guys looking at? Or do they not know the rules? The commentators kind of joked that the receiver was out of bounds before making the catch, so it was clearly obvious, but they never really pushed the fact that it would make it an illegal catch. To me, this is just complete incompetence on the part of the officials.
 
ESPN only showed the actual catch too, not whether he was in bounds before it or not. Looked mighty, mighty suspicious
 
A forward pass illegally touched by an eligible A player who goes out of bounds during the down is a Loss of Down per rule 7-3-4 [exception is if the A player was blocked out of bounds and immediately returns inbounds.]
 
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-II).
[Exception: This does not apply to an eligible offensive player who attempts
to return inbounds immediately after going out of bounds due to contact by an
opponent (A.R. 7-3-4-III)].
PENALTY—Loss of down at the previous spot [S16 and S9].
 
Someone mentioned in the game thread, that illegal touching is not reviewable. Is this true?
 
You could clearly see his feet out on the first replay they showed. That's just the kind of bullshit you're going to get down at Clemson--it has always been that way down there.
 
He was clearly out of bounds before he caught the ball. The replay officials probably just chose to ignore that part of the replay, since the fix was in to screw Wake at every chance. Enjoy that early Christmas present from the ACC refs Tigers!!!
 
I am seriously at a loss about that play. I thought maybe I was stupid and didn't know the rule. He was clearly out of bounds before he jumped to make the catch. It was clear. Not even debatable.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Someone mentioned in the game thread, that illegal touching is not reviewable. Is this true?
Click to expand...

I can see how you can't give the penalty after the review; however, I would think that it would go into the decision whether it was a catch or not. Since an illegal player touched the ball, it can't be a catch.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Someone mentioned in the game thread, that illegal touching is not reviewable. Is this true?
Click to expand...

http://www.arbitersports.com/Groups/104777/Library/files/InstantReplayPlaySituations.pdf

This seems to suggest that it is reviewable. From the document -

"Receiver stepping out of bounds
3. First and 10 on the A-20. A10 throws a pass to A80 at the A-40 near the sideline. A80 catches the ball and runs to the 50 where he is tackled. Replays show that A-80 stepped out of bounds on his own at the A35 before coming back inbounds to catch the pass.
RULING: Reviewable play. Reverse to illegal touching of a pass. A 2-10 on A-20 (Rule 12-3-2-b)."
 
The "penalty" is a loss of down at the previous spot. It's the same as an incomplete pass. I'm so angry right now.
 
They showed that one close up of his toes barely being in bounds, so obviously the heels had to be out of bounds, before they came off the ground. This wasn't a case of there not being conclusive evidence to overturn a call. The replay clearly showed that the TE was out of bounds before he made the catch. So either the review official doesn't know the rules or just chose to completely ignore them.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Someone mentioned in the game thread, that illegal touching is not reviewable. Is this true?
Click to expand...

It took them years to find it at Penn State. They're clearly not going to see it in a Death Valley endzone.
 
There's another rule nuance I am not clear on. I guess they changed this recently, but I may have missed it, but apparently it is now FUCKING LEGAL TO HOLD GOD DAMN CAMPANARO ANY TIME HE IS AN ELIGIBLE RECEIVER. And not just a quick subtle hold. I mean, fucking grab him, and don't let go for 15 mother fucking yards holding.
 
demondeacfreak said:
http://www.arbitersports.com/Groups/104777/Library/files/InstantReplayPlaySituations.pdf

This seems to suggest that it is reviewable. From the document -

"Receiver stepping out of bounds
3. First and 10 on the A-20. A10 throws a pass to A80 at the A-40 near the sideline. A80 catches the ball and runs to the 50 where he is tackled. Replays show that A-80 stepped out of bounds on his own at the A35 before coming back inbounds to catch the pass.
RULING: Reviewable play. Reverse to illegal touching of a pass. A 2-10 on A-20 (Rule 12-3-2-b)."
Click to expand...

Wow - that is damning. Is there someone at the ACC office we could email? I would like a simple answer - did the review official not know the rule or did he simply choose to ignore it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top