When is ball legally out-of-bounds?

Last minute short kickoff, Frey bats the ball out of bounds and the ruling is that the ball was already out of bounds when he made contact (ignoring whether his foot touched the line as the TSN shot was not “irrefutable? with an obstruction in the way… where was an end zone or SKYCAM shot? No Skycams this year?).

Receivers can have 1 or both feet in bounds yet catch the ball after it’s broken the plane of the sidelines, is there a different rule on kicks or punts? The ruling seems to be that ball must have broken the plane of the boundary line yet that doesn’t seem to apply to receptions. Was Acklin’s TD catch an example?

Just wondering…

I thought he was out when the play was first run and was surprised at the initial reaction. To my eyes it is clear the side of his foot is just over the line. Tough break.

The ball is out of bounds when it touches the ground out of bounds or a player who is out of bounds touches it.

Hence the catch counts because Acklin’s feet were in bounds.

The ruling on the kick was Frey’s foot touched the out of bounds when he dived. He was therefore out of bounds when he touched the ball.

If his foot was completely in bounds and he made the same play it would have been ticats ball.

He could have also left it. As I recall, Jackson Bennett was right behind him & could have touched the ball, giving us possession. Clearly though, he thought he was still in bounds.

If you’re in contact with out of bounds when you touch it, the ball is deemed out.

If you go out and come back in and are first to touch the ball, it’s illegal participation.

They did call illegal kickoff out of bounds which technically may have been the wrong call, but we wouldn’t have got the ball anyways.

Just watched the replay and it was the correct call , unfortunately for us . While Frey should be commended for his hustle and determination on that play the replay clearly shows that he was OB (but just barely ) Tough break on a tough night for us all around where things just didn’t go our way for the first time this season .

Yeah, I know. My point was, if he had not touched the ball, he wouldn’t have been called for illegal participation & Bennett could have recovered it, giving us the ball.

A well executed short kick, though. Having two kickers line up kept the Als spread out. That ball bounced with no Als in sight.

Hats off to Coach Reinebold for creativity at least!

Keep that play well-practiced for November!

I just wish we hadn’t spent so much time driving for a TD on our second-last drive. We could’ve kicked a short FG with over 2 minutes left. I’m thinking Coach O didn’t trust the D to make a stop?

Oh well. Flush it. Wipe. Next.

You are correct.
And the ball took a straight up bounce which helped us.

My overall question came from the way the play was called or ruled by the officials.

No mention of Frey’s foot touching the sidelines but just the fact the ball was considered out of bounds when he punched at it and that it had yet to touch the out-of-bounds turf but merely broke the plane of the sidelines. Maybe the official CFL game recap or penalty summary (I couldn’t find it☹?) lists the ruling differently but the way it was called on the field made me question the call.

If Frey’s “illegal? involvement would have been included in the explanation I wouldn’t have questioned or wondered about the ruling… or when a ball is considered to be out-of-bounds.

Isn’t it only illegal if you step out of bounds and then step back onto the field? Frey stepped out and then touched the ball. No more illegal than a receiver trying to make a catch but landing out of bounds.

Which is why I think the ball is ruled out of bounds. Otherwise it would have been an illegal touching penalty.

I rewound the game at that point to try to figure out what was going on with that call. A little confusing, particularly as the announcing team seemed just as confused (which seems like that’s happening more and more this year).