Als at Riders GDT Fri 8pm CT

[bomb squad]

Ok, then I think I can get a consensus then with a slightly changed scenario:

WR catches the ball in-bounds at LoS near the left sideline.  Puts it in left hand and dangles it above the sideline.  Runs all the way down the field like that.  At the 1YL he puts the ball in his right hand so the ball is clearly in-bounds.  He crosses the goal line.

Is this a TD?

Can I assume everyone, including bomb squad thinks YES, this is a TD?  If so, I'll finally have my answer and can sleep at night once again.

I still see that definition as not saying anything about the sideline PLANE.  To me "touches a sideline" means it physically contacts the turf, not an abstract plane.  So I think, as written, s9a1 means hovering doesn't make a ball dead.

Riderfans is the wild west compared to this place!  If they mod anything, I've never seen the evidence  :-)  Don't worry, I always pack my pea shooter.

Hey, come on, you can't just change the scenario just for the sake of consensus. That's kind of like cheating.  Since your scenario is theoretically possible (even practically if it's close to the goal line), there has to be a definitive yes or no answer. Therefore, since it's a fact that the ball must break the plane of the goal line in order for it to be a td, the answer is has to be no. Correct?

I still see that definition as not saying anything about the sideline PLANE.  To me "touches a sideline" means it physically contacts the turf, not an abstract plane.  So I think, as written, s9a1 means hovering doesn't make a ball dead.

There's no disagreement on this. We've already established that.

Riderfans is the wild west compared to this place!

I have an account there, but very rarely post unless it's strictly CFL related. IMO any comment or analysis from outside about the Riders, good, bad, or indifferent, is generally not going to be welcomed and probably be seen as patronizing. It's somewhat understandable, but they take it to another level. That's just me though. You're brave to do it. I do enjoy reading over there however.

[TecnoGenius]

I have an account there, but very rarely post unless it's strictly CFL related. IMO any comment or analysis from outside about the Riders, good, bad, or indifferent, is generally not going to be welcomed and probably be seen as patronizing. It's somewhat understandable, but they take it to another level. That's just me though. You're brave to do it. I do enjoy reading over there however.

Our forum does it so much better, probably why we have more other-team fans here than they do there.  And I don't even think it's just because our mods would banhammer our members' posts if they were too out of line... I just don't think our members would bother being that disagreeable.

We jibe and we poke fun and we laugh and we build up our team here.  For visitors here it's more like attending a real game @PAS... for the most part they'll get friendly treatment with the odd "boo go home chuckle laugh".  Not so much at the Riderfans forum!  It's like they're mad you exist.  Oh well!  I'll keep trying anyhow, to bring the facts.  I've already made a couple of new acquaintances from my posts there!  The nicer fans keep a lower profile so that their bullies don't turn on them too, I guess!     

[TecnoGenius]

Hey, come on, you can't just change the scenario just for the sake of consensus. That's kind of like cheating.  Since your scenario is theoretically possible (even practically if it's close to the goal line), there has to be a definitive yes or no answer. Therefore, since it's a fact that the ball must break the plane of the goal line in order for it to be a td, the answer is has to be no. Correct?

Reread my new scenario.  Right before crossing the GL plane the R pulls the ball in-bounds so it properly, legally, breaks the GL plane in the normal manner.  I'm pretty sure you'll say YES it's a TD (finally!).

And if so I'm fully satisfied and everyone else who chimed in also said YES so my work is done here!

[bomb squad]

Reread my new scenario.  Right before crossing the GL plane the R pulls the ball in-bounds so it properly, legally, breaks the GL plane in the normal manner.  I'm pretty sure you'll say YES it's a TD (finally!).

And if so I'm fully satisfied and everyone else who chimed in also said YES so my work is done here!

Oh, I see. You're no longer interested in the original scenario because you don't like the answer. Moving on.

[TecnoGenius]

Oh, I see. You're no longer interested in the original scenario because you don't like the answer. Moving on.

Holy smokes, rough crowd.

The entire point of my scenario is: is a ball dead when it hovers over the sideline.  The TD part is irrelevant.  I was just trying to keep my scenario simple, but you gave a good reason why the GL plane-crossing moment is special.  So I took that out of the scenario.

All I'm trying to do is find a scenario where the ball can be hovering over the rail for a while and still "count" as yards gained.  The point isn't the scenario, the scenario is just a tool to prove the point.

Since you already agreed that except for the GL plane part a ball can hover over the sideline and not be OOB, and since no one besides you said "no" in any manner, I'll finally close my book on this and conclude that a ball is not dead nor "OOB" if it hovers over, but does not touch, the sideline.

And that's all I ever wanted.  So thank you.