- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Trying more to understand this fumble non recovery
Posted on 11/6/22 at 7:55 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 11/6/22 at 7:55 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
There isn’t a process to it like a catch, you either control the ball or you don’t.
quote:
Exactly. This isn't a reception, with those rules.
Don’t know where y’all are coming up with that, but the rules for a catch and a recovery are the same. Namely that the player must maintain possession long enough to “perform an act common to the game” (e.g. the old “football move”).
Doesn’t say the player has to perform a football move, but he must possess the ball long enough to do so.
The only difference between the rules for a catch and fumble recovery is that a catch cannot hit the ground, while a recovery can.
2
Posted on 11/6/22 at 7:55 am to SlowFlowPro
If the shoe were on the other foot and LSU benefitted from this rule, what would you be doing right now?
Go do that!
Go do that!
Posted on 11/6/22 at 7:57 am to burke985
LSU player had 2 hands on ball, that’s possession of a fumble. Not sure how you spin the rule to say there was no possession.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 7:59 am to BigDropper
If the shoe were on the other foot the call on the field would have stood.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:01 am to LCLa
I agree with that but how can you have 2 hands on the ball with a knee down and not be considered down and with possession? Then the hand comes in and swipes the ball loose. Kinda like the play is over and runner was down by contact on a perceived fumble IMO.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:05 am to RUKIDDINGME
quote:
This is exactly correct. Something no one mentioned is the LSU player had both hands on the ball with his knee on the ground before the Alabama player touched the ball. Should of been LSU ball as the LSU player had full possession before the out of bounds player knocked it out of his hands.
Correct. If you apply the rule that an OOB player touching a ball kills a play, then as soon as he touches the ball, the play is dead. He does so when the LSU player has both hands on the ball. The OOB player touching the ball is what knocks it loose again. Therefore, it shouldn't matter because the play should've already been ruled dead. At that point, the LSU player has possession with his knee down. Knee down with posession also ends a play. The refs got this one wrong. And if they did go by the letter of the rule, the rule lacks common sense in regards to other rules.
And speaking of knee down, the BAMA RB slipped on that 4th down play and his knee touched down for a loss on the play. It was never reviewed and Bama got the 1st down instead.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:10 am to lostinbr
You say the rules are the same, but then you go and say the differences between the two?? In order to make a football come to a complete stop and to literally quit moving, you have to have possession. If not, the ball keeps rolling, spinning, or moving in some way. There is zero movement, in fact, you see it come to a complete sudden stop, mid spin.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:10 am to Penrod
LSU had covered the ball by the time Bama player touched the ball, call was wrong. If player hadn’t covered the the and Bama player touched then that call would have been correct. Bama ultimately made a TD during that retention.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:10 am to Bedtiger
quote:
LSU player had 2 hands on ball, that’s possession of a fumble. Not sure how you spin the rule to say there was no possession.
quote:
Catch, Interception, Recovery
ARTICLE 3.
a. To catch a ball means that a player:
1. Secures firm control with the hand(s) or arm(s) of a live ball in flight before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of the body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable that player to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., and
4. Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
b. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent) the player must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also required for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and going to the ground out of bounds. If the player loses control of the ball which then touches the ground before they regain control, it is not a catch. If the player regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is a catch.
c. If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the ground with any part of their body, or if there is doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; the player must lose control of the ball in order for there to be a loss of possession.
d. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control and continues to maintain control, and the elements above are satisfied, it is a catch.
. . .
g. A player recovers a ball if they fulfill the criteria in paragraphs a, b, c, and d for catching a ball that is still alive after hitting the ground.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:13 am to JDB1318
quote:
You say the rules are the same, but then you go and say the differences between the two??
Yes, I pointed out the obvious difference; that a catch cannot touch the ground. I don’t think that’s especially difficult to understand.
quote:
In order to make a football come to a complete stop and to literally quit moving, you have to have possession. If not, the ball keeps rolling, spinning, or moving in some way. There is zero movement, in fact, you see it come to a complete sudden stop, mid spin.
See post above.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:14 am to Sir Fury
This play and the "pass interference" /tipped ball play in Alabama's overtime possession may have had something to do with Kelly's decision to go for two following our overtime TD. The longer overtime goes the more likely some referee call decides the game.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:17 am to BayouBlitz
quote:If two hands grasping the ball with a knee down isn’t showing complete possession than what does? The bama player came from out of bounds and knocked it out of LSU players hands AFTER LSU player possessed the ball. This is the exact type of call that hosed us on the Patrick Peterson interception against bama and the refs on that game.
The LSU player didn't show complete possession of the ball.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:19 am to Sir Fury
quote:
Correct. If you apply the rule that an OOB player touching a ball kills a play, then as soon as he touches the ball, the play is dead. He does so when the LSU player has both hands on the ball. The OOB player touching the ball is what knocks it loose again. Therefore, it shouldn't matter because the play should've already been ruled dead. At that point, the LSU player has possession with his knee down. Knee down with posession also ends a play. The refs got this one wrong. And if they did go by the letter of the rule, the rule lacks common sense in regards to other rules.
No. The same rule does not apply to a ball in player possession.
quote:
RULE 4 / BALL IN PLAY, DEAD BALL, OUT OF BOUNDS
SECTION 2. Out of Bounds
Held Ball Out of Bounds
ARTICLE 2. A ball in player possession is out of bounds when either the ball or any part of the ball carrier touches the ground or anything else that is out of bounds, or that is on or outside a boundary line, except another player or game official.
Loose Ball Out of Bounds
ARTICLE 3. a. A ball not in player control, other than a kick that scores a field goal, is out of bounds when it touches the ground, a player, a game official or anything else that is out of bounds, or that is on or outside a boundary line.
b. A ball that touches a pylon is out of bounds behind the goal line.
c. If a live ball not in player possession crosses a boundary line and then is declared out of bounds, it is out of bounds at the crossing point.
They clearly ruled that LSU did not have possession of the loose ball before it was touched.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:20 am to engl6914
quote:Exactly, you could tell CBK knew the fix was in after the tipped PI call.
some referee call decides the game.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:22 am to ThatTahoeOverThere
You are correct! Someone show me where you have to have 2 hands on the ball for x seconds to have “ possession”. Another example of Refs using their input to influence game outcome.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:24 am to dltigers3
quote:
I think comparing it to the kellen mond play is the best example. If mond had possession, we certainly did last night
That only points to the fact that the ruling in the A&M game was incorrect.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:25 am to burke985
quote:passing rules are newer than the player or non player out of bounds touching a live ball. ANY part of a player out of bounds makes the player out of bounds. It is one of the oldest rules in the game.
The receiving rule
quote:
any receiver who has by any means gone out of bounds may not catch, or be the first to touch, any pass. Re-establishing himself in bounds makes the pass complete, but his touching of the pass remains illegal.
So why can a receiver who caught a ball in bounds fumbled went out of bounds not have to re establish himself inbounds before being able to obtain possession or even touch ball. This is literally the dumbest rule I think I’ve ever seen with this fumble
can a player that willingly goes out of bounds come back in and participate in the play?
I am amazed at how many people simply do not know the rules.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:27 am to LSUSkip
I've played football and been watching football all my life and have never seen such an idotic "rule" overturn clear possession of a fumble. The refs ruled LSU had possession of the ball on the field, and there is no way that call should have been overturned by the fact that the TE grazed the ball with his hand while his feet were out of bounds when Brooks already had possession.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:27 am to Penrod
It is a dumb arse rule. He went out of bounds without the ball. While out of bounds and ineligible, he reached back into the field of play to touch the ball. And gets rewarded for it.
Posted on 11/6/22 at 8:27 am to bass
quote:
If two hands grasping the ball with a knee down isn’t showing complete possession than what does?
Maintaining it long enough to make a football move.
Here’s one way to think about it: If it had been an INT instead of a fumble recovery.. did he have control of the ball long enough for it to be a catch + fumble if he lost it?
Yes? Then he had possession.
No? Then he didn’t have possession.
The knee being down makes absolutely no difference with regards to whether or not we had possession.
Two hands on the ball is only one part of having possession. You have to maintain control just as long as you would on a catch.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News