Zebra Report: Know Your Surroundings

Zebra Report is FanHouse's analysis of actual NFL rules and how they are to be applied ... because most fans think they could do a better job than the NFL officials, yet definitely could not. Click here for an introduction as to how we do things.

This past week of NFL play was relatively quiet in terms of complaints about the officiating. Note I said "relatively," because there are always a bevy of complaints -- many warranted and many ridiculously unwarranted. We know that. Regardless, we're still here to sift through some of the more intriguing rules-type interpretations, so let's dive in.

- A loyal reader (Dave B.) submitted this question on a play that caused a bit of a scrap on the Falcons' sideline:

"I was hoping you might take a look at the late hit by LaRon Landry in the 'Skins-Falcons game. I've tried to look at it, and it seems that Matt Ryan hadn't stepped out of bounds yet (his body was over the line, but neither of his feet had touched) when Landry made contact with him. If that were true, isn't Ryan still technically in bounds? The hit did seem pretty unnecessary, but wasn't against the rules if Ryan's foot hadn't touched yet."

Watch the play in this highlight package, it starts at the 1:09 mark.

This is one of the tougher judgment calls officials have to make, especially in full-speed and in a split-second. Here is the portion of the rule (12-2-8, p. 82) which applies here.

"(Unnecessary roughness includes ... ) contacting a runner out of bounds. Defensive players must make an effort to avoid contact. Players on defense are responsible for knowing when a runner has crossed the boundary line, except in doubtful cases where he might step on a boundary line and continue parallel with it."

This is a part of the rules constantly taught to lower-level officials in clinics by the NFL guys. At every level, it is the responsibility of the defender to avoid contact on a player entering the end zone is clearly going out of bounds. In the case of Ryan, there was no danger of him cutting back into the field of play. When someone is slowing down and clearly looking straight out of bounds and heading that way, the defenders need to avoid contact. He's not cutting back and staying in bounds, so just let him run out. It harms no one.

This call becomes extremely tough when a player isn't necessarily showing signs of wanting to go out and may still make a cut up-field. It's all discretionary, but the rules of football are very clear in that the burden is on the defensive player to know his surroundings.

In this specific case, I don't even think there's a question that Ryan was clearly headed straight out of bounds -- and was already there -- by the time Landry hit him.

- In the Colts-Texans game, Ryan Moats is tackled just shy of the end zone and the ball comes loose. Upon further review the officials rule that it was a fumble and the ball was never out of bounds. You can watch the play by clicking here and watching at the 35-second mark and beyond. There are several elements here that must be reviewed.

First of all, was it a fumble? It does appear the ball is coming loose before a knee hits the ground. Was it conclusive? I think so, but others may have a different opinion.

Secondly, was any player out of bounds when touching the ball -- even if he doesn't have possession? If so, the ball is dead. You might think the ball was definitely touching Moats when he was out of bounds, but was he legally out of bounds? I point you to the definition of being out of bounds (rule 3-21, p. 11), where it says that someone -- or the ball -- is out of bounds when touching "anything other than a player, an official or a pylon on or outside the boundary line." That means that, since Moats was laying on top of Antoine Bethea, he was not out of bounds when he crossed the sideline.

From the Texans' point of view, they don't seem to be questioning the part about Moats being out (though that's the main complaint of fans). They have offered up that they believe Bethea -- who was definitely on the ground and out of bounds -- touched the ball. There are some still photos and an argument that Bethea touched the ball when he was out of bounds contained in this linked article. We've included a poll to let us know what you think, and feel free to drop comments. This was a very close one.

- As I've said before, you can't exactly trust announcers to know the rules. We can add former-Super-Bowl-champion-coaches-turned-announcers to that list. During the fourth quarter, the Saints punted the ball near their own end zone. A member of the Saints' coverage team accidentally ran into the end zone, but got himself back out before touching the ball. It was downed on the one. "He can't be the first one to touch that!" Brian Billick screamed. Um, Brian, yes he can. It's not the sideline. Here is the only stipulation involving coverage team contact with the goal line on a punt (rule 9-2-2, p. 63):

Item 2: If a player of the kicking team touches the goal line with any part of his body while touching the ball, the ball is dead, and the result of the play is a touchback.

He doesn't even have to get both feet established, as play-by-play announcer Thom Brennaman tried to tell Billick. Just don't be touching the goal line with anything.

- Reader James G. submitted this question. In the Raiders-Chargers Week 8 game, there was a questionable play followed by a false start. After the five-yard penalty was marked off, there ended up being a challenge. The simple answer to the question, "how can you challenge the previous play after a false start" is precisely that a false start doesn't constitute an actual play. It's not a play. So there still hasn't been a play run since the questionable (and still reviewable) play. Of course, James didn't make it easy on me. He asked a legitimate question as a follow up. What if the play is reversed and the spot is changed? Would the false start still be assessed? I searched through the entire enforcement and instant replay sections of the rulebook and found absolutely nothing resembling direction on this question. I have no idea. I would guess that the penalty is not assessed and is simply ignored because they altered the previous result, but that's just an educated guess. Well, as educated as you consider me, at least.

- Vikings fans/Steelers haters, there was a tripping call on Arizona in the Bears-Cardinals game for the exact same action as was called on Minnesota in Pittsburgh a few weeks back. Seriously, it was like the lineman was trying to emulate Jeff Dugan by whipping both legs back up at the leaping defender. What happened there? Was this game fixed, too? Are the Bears "stealers," too?

- Finally, in that same game, Tommie Harris was ejected for punching a Cardinals lineman in the first quarter. This was an absolute no-brainer. Good decision by Ed Hochuli.

Got a rules-related question? Whether it's elementary, high school or NFL, email TZR and he'll see what he can do.