Billy, no one has claimed it wasn't grounding. The closest anyone came was when one person mentioned that Dovell was about 5 yards further downfield, but even then they didn't say it wasn't grounding. I have no doubt that you know and understand the grounding rule, but there was no reason to even go there. The simple answer would have been to just say "Dovell wasn't close enough" or "the refs didn't think TT was trying to get it to Dovell".

Then, to make matters worse, once you started going into the grounding rule, you muddied the picture instead of making it clearer. Your response "it didn't cross the LOS" wasn't helpful because no one claimed it did, and if he was still in the tackle box, as you claimed, it wouldn't have mattered if it crossed it anyway. In the end the pass had to be near a receiver, and it wasn't, and that's all that mattered.

Everyone is/was upset about the spot. Most people are upset that the officials didn't find a way to fix their clear error. No one is/was ever claiming it wasn't grounding.

LC, case one for a person hinting at, if not saying this was not grounding. so do not tell me NO argued this was not grounding.

I stand corrected - I said that one person had asked if Dovell was close enough to the play for it not to be grounding, and it was two people, not one. Interestingly, neither you, nor anyone else ever addressed their question of whether Dovell was close enough to the play and attempted to answer it. Why? Because for some reason the conversation veered off-course into an discussion of the tackle box, and whether the pass crossed the line of scrimmage, which no one was questioning.

Would you care to go back and answer their question? How close to Dovell would the ball had to have come for it not to have been grounding?

Interesting question as the IG rule took a drastic change in 2011, here is the verbiage:

And now the need for a “reasonable opportunity” has been removed again:
beginning in 2011, the passer can legally “ground” the ball if he throws it into an area where there is an eligible teammate—period. The eligible receiver does not need to have a chance of catching the ball.
Here’s the rule:
Rule 7-3-2-f and h
A forward pass is illegal if:
f. The passer to conserve time throws the ball forward into an area where there is no eligible Team A receiver.

That my friend is the $64,000.00 question. You hit it the nail on the head though, you have to look into the QB's mind. Somewhere on my computer I have an excellent read in a journal about how this is one of the toughest calls in football, let me try and find that for you.



In regards to the yardage requirement, this is from a NCAA Memo regarding IG:

"1. There is not, nor will there ever be, an exact yardage distance between the receiver and where the pass lands that will absolutely determine whether a foul has been committed. That distance can vary significantly based on the circumstances of the play and the direction of the pass. This phrase "direction of the pass" is emphasized as it provides the crucial piece of evidence that allows us to determine the "intentional" aspect of the play. For example, the quarterback in the pocket throws the ball toward eligible receiver A88 who is five yards downfield, but the pass lands seven yards short directly in front of A88. This would not be a foul. However, if the pass is thrown away from A88 and lands seven yards to his left as A88 crosses to the right, this would indeed be a foul. Note: seven yards is used simply as an example---it is not intended to be "the yardage guideline." In making this determination, officials are to use “direction of the pass” to judge how far away from an eligible receiver the ball must be before calling a foul. We should stretch this distance as much as reasonably possible based on the direction of the pass. For a foul to be called it should be clear to everyone that the passer throws the ball into an area not occupied by an eligible receiver. Do not be overly technical."

Clearly the receiver was interfered with. Equally clearly, if he hadn't have been interfered with, there was no way he had a chance to prevent the interception, much less a chance to catch the ball.