Friday, December 4, 2015

THE TOUCHDOWN DEBATE [Warning: Blog item casually uses an off-color word]

When  I  was  a  kid,  I  played  in  high  school  level  playground  football,  the  "125s,"  out  of  Frankford  Playground,    in  the  Frankford  section  of  Philadelphia.   
Aerial  view  of  Frankford  Playground.
The  ambulances  to  carry  the  suburban  kids
to  the  hospital  used  to  wait  on  Saul  Street.

I  was  a  first  string  left  tackle,   a  second  string  halfback,    and  the  third  string  quarterback,  although  to  tell  the  truth  that  last  one  is  more  of  a  comment  on  the  team's  lack  of  demand  for  player  skill  rather  than  on  my  legerdemain   --  I  can  remember  the  beloved  coach,  a  big  guy  with  a  voice  that  sounded  like  coal  coming  down  Chute  Number  Nine  named   Tom  McCarthy,  yelling,  "Pete,   stop  carrying  the  football  like  a  loaf  of  bread!"

We  were,  however,  a  big,  powerful  team  compared  to  others  in  the  Philadelphia  playground  league.  I  remember   genuinely  regretting   football  games  against  suburban  teams   --  it  seemed  like  we  were  always   sending  one  or  more  of  the  skinny,  lanky  suburban  players  to  the  hospital  in  the  ambulance  parked  next  to  the  ballfield  every  game.  This  is  not  an  exaggeration. 


1960s  Ambulance

I  became   a  nerdy   "intellectual  type"  in  my  college  and  law  school  years,    largely  disinterested   in  football.     This  continued  through  most  of  my  marriage.  My  wife,  Rise`,  was  the  Eagle's  fan,  not  me.

Until  a  few  years  ago.      Rise`  now  says,  "I  can't  believe  it!  Out  of  the  blue,  a  few  years  ago,  you  suddenly  started  becoming  fanatical  about  football!     It's  very  annoying!   Now  I  have  to  watch  the  games,  even  when  I  want  to  turn  them  off  because  the  Eagles  are  losing  so  bad,  because  you  want  to  watch  them!"

I  like  Eagles  coach  Chip  Kelly  --  well,  until  recently.   Now,  Chip  has  accidentally  created  a  team  that  is  boring.    And,  I  guess  because  I  am  a  lawyer,  he  sometimes  drives  me  crazy  with  how  often  he  lets  the  refs  get  away  with  apparently  bad  calls.

The  situations  like  that  which  have  really  made  me  crazy  were  about  the  most  important  thing  in  football  --  the  touchdown  calls.  Functionally,  the  problem  is  that  there  is  no  good  definition  of  what  a  "touchdown"  is  which  is  applicable  to  all  situations. 

HYPOTHETICAL:   The  current  score  is  VISITORS  35,  EAGLES  34.    There  is  1  second  left  on  the  clock.    The  Eagles  have  the  ball.    The  Eagles  receiver  is  in  the  end  zone  with  a  bunch  of  players  from  the Visitors'  defense  trying  to  keep  him  from  catching  the  ball.  The  Eagles  quarterback throws  a  Hail  Mary.   The  Eagles  receiver  jumps  and  rises  up  into  the  sky  above  the  end  zone,   higher  than  anyone  thought  possible,   and  raises  his  arms  up,  and  catches  the  football,  and  while  in  the  air  he  pulls  the  ball  down  to  his  body  and  has  a  very  firm  grip  on  it.

Aghast,  the  Eagles'   crowd  cheers.

Touchdown?

Nope!   Not  yet!

One  of  the  Visitors  defenders  tackles   the Eagles  receiver  with  the  ball  is  firmly  in  control  in  the  Eagles'  receivers'  hands,  while  the  Eagles  receiver  is  still  in  the  air.

The  Visitors  defensive  tackler's  tackling  motion  carries  the   Eagles'  receiver  out  of  the  back  of  the  end  zone  before  his  feet  touch  the  ground.

Ruling:   No  touchdown.

No  touchdown???!!!  No  touchdown???!!!

I've  seen  it  happen   twice  in  the  last  few  years.    No  touchdown.

The  problem  is  the  official  NFL  Rules.   And  it's  a  big,  big,  big  problem.

Vis-a-vis  the  preceding  situation,   we  refer  to

Order  of  the  Rules
Rule  3.  Definitions
Section  2.  The  Ball  and  Possession  of  the  Ball
Article  7.  Player  Possession
Item  2.  Possession  of  a  Loose  Ball
To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted, or recovered, a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet or any other part of his body, other than his hands, completely on the ground inbounds, and then maintain control of the ball until he has clearly become a runner. A player becomes a runner when he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground, there is no possession. This rule applies in the field of play and in the end zone.

That's  pretty  clear.    Not  dramatically  clear,  but  pretty  clear.    In  effect,  the  Rules,  as  written,  want  to  see  the  receiver  spending  some  time  physically  on  the  ground,   poised  to   defend  against  bad  guys  attacking  him.   In  our  hypothetical,  here,    the  Eagles  receiver  never  did  that.

Okay.  Okay.  If  that's  what  they  demand ...

HYPOTHETICAL:   Same  facts,  except  that  instead  of  being  tackled  in  mid-air  and  carried  out  the  back  of  the  end  zone,   our  flying  Eagles  receiver   comes  down  hard   on  his  ass  in  the  end  zone.

Hmmm.    While  this  is  clearly  "complete control of the ball and hav[ing] *** [a] part of his body, other than his hands, completely on the ground inbounds,"  is  this  "maintain[ing] control of the ball until he has clearly become a runner. A player becomes a runner when he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent"?

Yow!   I  doubt  it!

Yet,  no  ref  in  the  league  would  have  the  courage  to  call  such  a  successful   reception  in  the  end  zone  a  non-touchdown,  right?

In  awarding  a  touchdown  in  the  latter  case,  but  not  the  former,  a  ref  could  say,   "Listen,  the  goal  of  football   is  to  have   the  ball  firmly  in  the  end  zone.    This  is  clearly  the  intent  of  the  rules,  which  must  be  applied  to  the  meaning.  The  ball  firmly  in  the  Eagles  receivers'  arms  followed  by  the  Visitors  defenders'  failure  to  throw  him  out  of  the  end  zone  before  he  is  firmly  on  the  ground  on  his  ass   is  grounds  enough   to  award  a  touchdown.     Right?  Right?"

Okay.  Okay.  But  then,  how  about  this ? ...

HYPOTHETICAL:   Same  facts,  except  that  instead  of  being  tackled  in  mid-air  and  carried  out  the  back  of  the  end  zone,   our  flying  Eagles  receiver   comes  down  hard   on  his  ass,  onto  the  shoulders  of  one  of  the  Visitors  defenders,  and  then  the  defenders,  with  the  Eagles  receiver  still  up  in  the  air  do  the  chicken  dance  in  the  end  zone  to  show  off  to  the  Eagles  crowd ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xmV5uHWNag

... and  then,  before  the  rest  of  the  offense  can  come  in  and  rescue  the  Eagles  receiver,  the  defenders  throw  the  Eagles  receiver  out  of  the  end  zone.

Well,  even  though  I've  never  seen  that  chicken  dance  thing  in  the  end  zone,    in  my  opinion   it's  NOT  a  touchdown.  It's  really  just   a  slowly-occurring   version  of  the  first  case,  at  the  beginning  of  this  blog  item.

What  would  the  refs  do  with  it?

That's  a  little  hard  to  say.    There  are  "notes"    after  the  official  NFL  rules  which  appear  to  be  an  official  part  of  the  rules  rather  than  mere   observations  or  opinions  or  interpretations.

Order  of  the  Rules
Rule  3.  Definitions
Section  2.  The  Ball  and  Possession  of  the  Ball
Article  7.  Player  Possession
Note  1.

"A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner.."

So,  just  "being  upright  long  enough,"  not  like  a  good  Presbyterian,     but  like  a  Dolphins  ball  carrier  or  a  Buccaneers  ball  carrier  or  a  Lions  ball  carrier,  is   enough  to  qualify  a  receiver  as  a  "runner."     

How  many  seconds  of  being  upright  on  the  shoulders  of  a  defender  doing  the  chicken  dance  in  the  end  zone  is  "long  enough"?

Let's  say  that  the  refs  rule  "touchdown"   because  the  defense  danced  the  chicken  dance  in  the  end  zone  with  the  Eagles  receiver  upright  on  their  shoulders  for  too  many  seconds.

Okay.  Okay.   But  how  about  this ? ...

HYPOTHETICAL:   Same  facts,  except  that  instead  of  being  tackled  in  mid-air  and  carried  out  the  back  of  the  end  zone,   our  flying  Eagles  receiver   comes  down  hard   on  his  side,  onto  the  shoulders  of  one  of  the  Visitors  defenders,  and  then  the  defenders,  with  the  Eagles  receiver  still  up  in  the  air,  on  his  side,  on  one  of  the  defenders'  shoulders,  do  the  chicken  dance  in  the  end  zone  to  show  off  to  the  Eagles  crowd,   and  then,  before  the  rest  of  the  offense  can  come  in  and  rescue  the  Eagles  receiver,  the  defenders  throw  the  Eagles  receiver  out  of  the  end  zone.

Hmmmmmmm.    Uprightness   is  no  longer  available  in  the  facts  as  a  way  of  finding  that  the  Eagles  receiver  has  become  a  "runner,"  as  required  by  the  official  NFL  rule  book.

So,  defenders  must  remember  that  if  they  do  the  chicken  dance  in  the  end  zone,  they  must  carry  the  Eagles  receiver  sideways.

Okay.  Okay.    But  how  about  this ? ...

HYPOTHETICAL:   Same  facts,  except  that  instead  of  being  tackled  in  mid-air  and  carried  out  the  back  of  the  end  zone,   our  flying  Eagles  receiver   comes  down  hard  sideways  onto  a  pile  of  Eagle  and  Visitors  players,    where  the  Visitors  defenders  are  crass   enough  to  tightly  hold  the  Eagles  receiver,  who  is  curled-up  like  a  fetus  around  the  ball,    on  the  top  of  the  pile,  with  no  part  of  the  Eagles  receivers'  body  ever  coming  in  contact  with  the  ground.  The  pile   freezes  in  this  position.    The  refs,  faced  with  an  ambiguous  situation,  take  out  some  folding  chairs   and  start  looking  at  pictures  in  National  Geographic  Magazine,  to  give  the  players  time  to  either  carry  the  sideways  guy  out  of  the  end  zone,  or  to  give  the  Eagles  receiver  time  to  figure  out  how  to  touch  the  ground.

One  minute  passes.  Two  minutes.   Finally,  Visitors  fans  start  throwing  beer  and  popcorn  at  Eagles  fans  in  the  stands,  and  the  Eagles'  fans  start  leaving  the  stadium,  knowing  that  it  is  impossible  that  the  Eagles  will  win  any  more  games.

Finally,  one  of  the  refs  blows   his  whistle.

How  should  he  rule?

2 comments:

  1. NO TOUCHDOWN. BOTH HIS FEET DID NOT TOUCH THE GROUND IN BOUNDS

    Peter J. Oteri

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey, Pete. How are you doing/ Even though this last hypothetical is the functional equivalent of the case where the end zone receiver is tackled-out-of the end zone before he touches the ground, I personally think that the refs will ignore the both-feet-on-the-ground rule and award the touchdown to the offensive receiver stuck in the "upper stories' of a pile-up in the end zone.


    Pete Dawson

    ReplyDelete