JFreak
Buck Fama
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2009
- Messages
- 3,473
- Likes
- 3,154
The loss of down penalty was for illegal touching…the TE was covered by the WR but went down field and caught the pass…it’s weird that it’s a loss of down penalty.During the OU game I believe we had an illegal formation penalty that resulted in a 5-yd penalty and loss of down. I don't recall ever seeing the loss of down before and can't find it anywhere in the NCAA rule book. Am I off my rocker?
It's my understanding that pros can't cover the TE with a WR either. A player with a 50, 60 or 70 must report as eligible but still can't be covered by a WR if they go downfield or catch a pass.I believe it was actually “illegal touching” since the ineligible man caught the ball. It was a result of the WR being lined up on the LOS instead off 1 yard.
Why NCAA doesn’t go to the pro rule here is stupid. Any player on offense with a 50, 60 or 70 number must check in as “eligible”. Otherwise anyone is eligible. It would make officiating easier which they desperately need to do
Yea, the loss of down on an intentional grounding call makes sense…the illegal touching should be treated as an incomplete pass…JMOYep, must be harsh penalty to keep ppl from trying to get away with it.
View attachment 680203
He was behind the line of scrimmage when he caught the ball. Not sure that changes the penalty but he was wasn’t across the line.The loss of down penalty was for illegal touching…the TE was covered by the WR but went down field and caught the pass…it’s weird that it’s a loss of down penalty.
Edit: The play by play actually says it was “illegal forward pass” but it was because the TE was an ineligible receiver