40 minutes ago, futurecoach said:

If I remember that play correctly, the ball was in his outside arm so the ball was more out of bounds on the other side of the pylon. So at that point all that mattered was getting his feet in the end zone, it didn’t matter that the ball itself was out of bounds on the other side of the pylon. 

 

That's why I am confused on this. The ball was outside the pylon. It never broke the plane inbounds. His foot hit the end zone and it was a TD. And Steratore said that was the correct call. No ballin the end zone. Only his foot. Still a TD. 

1 hour ago, wingt51 said:

I don't wanna be the "you're wrong" guy, but, every level of football that I'm familiar with when it comes to crossing the plain of the endzone it is all about the ball. Ball crosses the white line and nothing else crosses, TD. Whole body of the player is in the endzone but the ball doesn't cross the white line, no TD.

I am just relaying what NFL expert Gene Steratore said. I agree with everyone else. I have always thought the ball had to break the plane. Steratore said on that play it was a TD even though the ball never brokr the plane.

20 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

I am just relaying what NFL expert Gene Steratore said. I agree with everyone else. I have always thought the ball had to break the plane. Steratore said on that play it was a TD even though the ball never brokr the plane.

Did the ball go over or touch the pylon?

1 hour ago, futurecoach said:

If I remember that play correctly, the ball was in his outside arm so the ball was more out of bounds on the other side of the pylon. So at that point all that mattered was getting his feet in the end zone, it didn’t matter that the ball itself was out of bounds on the other side of the pylon. 

 

This makes sense.

3 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

That's why I am confused on this. The ball was outside the pylon. It never broke the plane inbounds. His foot hit the end zone and it was a TD. And Steratore said that was the correct call. No ballin the end zone. Only his foot. Still a TD. 

The goal line is extended out of bounds even past the pylon, as long as the player establishes himself in bounds in the end zone. Just like a receiver making a tip toe catch falling out of bounds in the end zone. The ball itself may be caught outside the pylon, but it is passed the extended goal line and the player is established in bounds in the end zone when it is caught. Which is why that counts. So in the case with Perine the ball was past the extended goal line out of bounds on the other side of the pylon, while his body got into the end zone. I think a lot of people think the ball has to pass inside the pylon or touch the pylon for it to count. Which is true if a guys body is say at the 3 yard line diving forward, the ball will need to pass inside the pylon at the goal line to count. He can’t dive from 3 yards out and try to extend the ball passed the the extended goal line out of bounds when his body was never established in the end zone.
 

When he gave that explanation. I think he was saying it didn’t matter that the ball didn’t pass the plane of the goal line inside the pylon, since he established himself in bounds in the end zone it was ok. Since the ball did pass the extended goal line with his body in the end zone. 
 

He honestly just didn’t give that good of explanation. So I definitely can see why that probably caused confusion on the rule. 

57 minutes ago, futurecoach said:

The goal line is extended out of bounds even past the pylon, as long as the player establishes himself in bounds in the end zone. Just like a receiver making a tip toe catch falling out of bounds in the end zone. The ball itself may be caught outside the pylon, but it is passed the extended goal line and the player is established in bounds in the end zone when it is caught. Which is why that counts. So in the case with Perine the ball was past the extended goal line out of bounds on the other side of the pylon, while his body got into the end zone. I think a lot of people think the ball has to pass inside the pylon or touch the pylon for it to count. Which is true if a guys body is say at the 3 yard line diving forward, the ball will need to pass inside the pylon at the goal line to count. He can’t dive from 3 yards out and try to extend the ball passed the the extended goal line out of bounds when his body was never established in the end zone.
 

When he gave that explanation. I think he was saying it didn’t matter that the ball didn’t pass the plane of the goal line inside the pylon, since he established himself in bounds in the end zone it was ok. Since the ball did pass the extended goal line with his body in the end zone. 
 

He honestly just didn’t give that good of explanation. So I definitely can see why that probably caused confusion on the rule. 

Correct. As long as the runner/receiver establishes himself inbounds in the end zone with possession of the ball, it doesn't matter whether the ball crosses inside or outside of the pylon. If the runner hasn't established himself inbounds across the goal line, the ball has to cross inside the pylon.