- 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
The fumble/forward pass dispute
Posted on 9/27/20 at 10:52 pm
Posted on 9/27/20 at 10:52 pm
My question is not whether that was a forward pass or a fumble but rather if you rule it a forward pass then why would it not be then flagged as intentional grounding? There is no receiver in the area and it is effectively a way of cheating the defense out of a sack. Has this ever been addressed?
Posted on 9/27/20 at 10:54 pm to southendzoneresident
You’re right and no one will have a good answer.
Posted on 9/27/20 at 10:55 pm to southendzoneresident
I’d like to see who the refs thought his “intended receiver” was on that “forward pass”
Posted on 9/27/20 at 10:55 pm to southendzoneresident
I agree on some level, but the penalty is intentional grounding. I know it's a misnomer, because you can intentionally ground it in some situations without penalty. And they never seem to follow the letter of the rule that allows them to call it in other situations where there was obviously no intent to throw a complete pass.
But I don't think I've ever seen a "tuck rule" type non-fumble called IG. I'm sure it has happened. I've just never seen it.
But I don't think I've ever seen a "tuck rule" type non-fumble called IG. I'm sure it has happened. I've just never seen it.
This post was edited on 9/27/20 at 10:56 pm
Posted on 9/27/20 at 10:56 pm to LanTheBuilder
quote:
You’re right and no one will have a good answer.
I'd also like to add the ball did not go past the LOS. I'm more concerned with this from a theoretical standpoint, as I'm sure this gets missed almost every time. LSU obviously did not lose the game due to this.
Posted on 9/27/20 at 10:59 pm to southendzoneresident
Why would you think they would know to call IG there? It took them several seconds and discussions to call the first 2.
Posted on 9/27/20 at 11:01 pm to LSUminati
Right I'm not saying this cost us the game. I'm saying I'd like a blanket rule passed that says if it is deemed a forward pass and not a fumble then an automatic 15 yard intentional grounding should be awarded. The defense should be rewarded in some way. This effectively makes it a get out of sack play.
Posted on 9/27/20 at 11:25 pm to southendzoneresident
He wasn’t throwing - he was trying to tuck the ball back in - and he dropped it.
Posted on 9/27/20 at 11:27 pm to southendzoneresident
His arm was hit. It’s not that difficult to understand.
Posted on 9/27/20 at 11:28 pm to southendzoneresident
quote:Because it quite obviously was not intentionally grounded.
My question is not whether that was a forward pass or a fumble but rather if you rule it a forward pass then why would it not be then flagged as intentional grounding?
Posted on 9/28/20 at 2:07 am to chasseur4
Chase ur 4 is correct
His hand was bringing it back when he got hit
Fumble
And it did cost us the game
His hand was bringing it back when he got hit
Fumble
And it did cost us the game
Posted on 9/28/20 at 6:24 am to southendzoneresident
i agree with everything you are saying, the stupid rule says if his arm is moving in a forward motion then its a pass- ok then, who the hell was he throwing to?
what's more frustrating is that we shouldn't have to rely on that call to win that game.
what's more frustrating is that we shouldn't have to rely on that call to win that game.
Posted on 9/28/20 at 8:36 am to southendzoneresident
quote:
if you rule it a forward pass then why would it not be then flagged as intentional grounding?
I said this exact same thing.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News