When is a player "down"? Rule change needed.

[BamaFossil]

Am I the only person who is bothered by the present determination of when a player is ruled "down"? Apparently the present rule is a player must be down on the ground before the play should be blown dead. Trouble is, that leaves open the possibility the ball carrier could be tackled, roll over the tackler, but so long as his knee, elbow, rear, or whatever doesn't touch the ground, he can get up and keep running. This means the defenders must either (a) belt the ball carrier after the apparent tackle and get the almost certain personal foul penalty; or (b) sit back and be prepared if the player hops up and keeps running.

Rule should be that a player on the ground becomes an extension of the ground. If the ball carrier sits on or his knees land on another player who is "down", then the ball carrier is down.

Hopefully the powers that be within the NCAA make this rule change.

 

[bayoutider]

You play till you hear the whistle, simple as that.

 

[Jay Hughes]

You play till you hear the whistle, simple as that.

Posted via Mobile Device

 

[Jay Hughes]

You play till you hear the whistle, simple as that.

I like the rule just the way that it is.
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[OreBama]

I like the rule as is. A player is not down until he's down... on the ground.

 

[Tide1986]

Am I the only person who is bothered by the present determination of when a player is ruled "down"? Apparently the present rule is a player must be down on the ground before the play should be blown dead. Trouble is, that leaves open the possibility the ball carrier could be tackled, roll over the tackler, but so long as his knee, elbow, rear, or whatever doesn't touch the ground, he can get up and keep running. This means the defenders must either (a) belt the ball carrier after the apparent tackle and get the almost certain personal foul penalty; or (b) sit back and be prepared if the player hops up and keeps running.

Rule should be that a player on the ground becomes an extension of the ground. If the ball carrier sits on or his knees land on another player who is "down", then the ball carrier is down.

Hopefully the powers that be within the NCAA make this rule change.

Interesting thought (even though I like the rule the way it is)...I can't remember which game it was today, but a player's foot contacted another player's hand that was out of bounds (on the ground), and the officials ruled the player (whose foot contacted the hand) out of bounds as a result. So...there seems to be some basis to support the rule change that you suggested.

 

[VolFan1]

You play till you hear the whistle, simple as that.

I don't know that there is a specific rule in college, but at the high school level this can really get players in trouble.

A couple of examples:

1 - When a players steps on the out of bounds, the play is dead. In high school you will sometimes see a late hit called when a player steps out and is hit late but before the whistle blows.

2 - When a QB takes a knee in victory formation. If he goes does immediately and a player busts through the line and hits him after he takes a knee but before the whistle blows.

As an official you are taught to not officiate with the whistle in your mouth. That way an inadvertent whistle is harder to have. With this technique, you are going to have a second or so of the ball becoming dead and the actually being blown dead.

I know players are taught to go until the whistle blows but this is not the best thing to do in all scenarios.

 

[Tidewater]

Interesting thought (even though I like the rule the way it is)...I can't remember which game it was today, but a player's foot contacted another player's hand that was out of bounds (on the ground), and the officials ruled the player (whose foot contacted the hand) out of bounds as a result. So...there seems to be some basis to support the rule change that you suggested.

That was Ole Miss vs Okie State. The OSU player stepped out of bounds, and the commentators said that he was out of bounds because he stepped on the hand of an Ole Miss player whose hand was out of bounds. The refs never said that. The Ole Miss player dragged the OSU player's toe to the turf out of bounds, so he was down at the nine yard line.
It did not change that much, because the OSU player stepped out of bounds later at the three yard line, but his toe had already contacted the turf out of bounds earlier, at the nine.

 

[Jref]

A runner is down when any part of his body other than his hands or feet touches the ground. He is also down when his forward progress has been stopped.

Why would you want to penalize the offense when the defense hasn't done it's job? If the same thing happens to Mark Ingram on Thursday night, wouldn't you be screaming if they called him down?

 

[TIDE-HSV]

A runner is down when any part of his body other than his hands or feet touches the ground. He is also down when his forward progress has been stopped.

Why would you want to penalize the offense when the defense hasn't done it's job? If the same thing happens to Mark Ingram on Thursday night, wouldn't you be screaming if they called him down?

I've seen so many bowl games, I forget in which it happened, but yesterday was a good example of a blown call on the "runner down" question. I commented on it at the time. The ball-carrier was running along the sideline. The first defender tried to block him out of bounds. Instead, the runner simply ducked his shoulder and rolled up and over the back of the defender in one smooth motion, never stopping his forward progress and no part of his body having touched the ground. He got about one more step when the second defender hit him with two hands, knocking him OOB. Result? The linesman drops the flag and calls the second defender for a PF. If there were a whistle, it was much too quick, because, as said, the runner never touched the ground or stopped...

 

[BamaFossil]

I've seen so many bowl games, I forget in which it happened, but yesterday was a good example of a blown call on the "runner down" question. I commented on it at the time. The ball-carrier was running along the sideline. The first defender tried to block him out of bounds. Instead, the runner simply ducked his shoulder and rolled up and over the back of the defender in one smooth motion, never stopping his forward progress and no part of his body having touched the ground. He got about one more step when the second defender hit him with two hands, knocking him OOB. Result? The linesman drops the flag and calls the second defender for a PF. If there were a whistle, it was much too quick, because, as said, the runner never touched the ground or stopped...

Good example.

Still another example from yesterday (don't recall which game): the defender tackled the runner by grabbing his body and both fell to the ground in a rolling motion. The defender hit the ground on his back and the runner landed on his back on top of the defender. No part of the runner touched the ground. In one smooth rolling motion, the runner rolled off the defender with only his feet and hands touching the ground. The runner continued running... but the official blew the whistle. So should the whistle have been blown?

In this situation, since the whistle was blown, if another defender had de-cleated the runner after he jumped up and started running again (but before the whistle blew), he would very likely have been hit with a flag. But if the whistle hadn't blown, this same defender would have watched in disbelief as the runner jumped up and ran for a TD. After being on his back on top of a defender.

Under what I assume are the present rules, too much judgment is required of a defender when a runner is tackled but rolls over the body of a defender and maybe-he-did/maybe-he-didn't touch his elbow/knee to the ground. Defender must make a split-second decision whether to "re-tackle" the runner and risk a penalty or stand back and watch the runner keep going.

The solution is not to keep playing until the whistle blows. That'll result in way too many roughing flags. IMO the solution is to change the rule to when a defender is laying on the ground, the defender becomes an extension of the ground.

And no, if this were the rule, I wouldn't complain if Ingram were ruled down in a similar situation.

 

[BamaFossil]

That was Ole Miss vs Okie State. The OSU player stepped out of bounds, and the commentators said that he was out of bounds because he stepped on the hand of an Ole Miss player whose hand was out of bounds. The refs never said that. The Ole Miss player dragged the OSU player's toe to the turf out of bounds, so he was down at the nine yard line.
It did not change that much, because the OSU player stepped out of bounds later at the three yard line, but his toe had already contacted the turf out of bounds earlier, at the nine.

No complaints on this one. It looked to me like the runner's toe dug up some turf in the OOB area.

But let's suppose the situation happened the way the commentators saw it. Suppose the runner clearly stepped on the hand of the defender, the defender's hand clearly being OOB. Would the runner have been ruled to have stepped OOB? Would it be because the hand-on-the-ground is deemed to be an extension of the ground?

 

[AlabamaAdam]

You play till you hear the whistle, simple as that.

Easy enough. I like the rule.