- 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: The Dumbest Rule in College Football
Posted on 7/25/22 at 2:08 pm to MEd LSU
Posted on 7/25/22 at 2:08 pm to MEd LSU
quote:
False statement. You would have to change the definition of a touchback. Not so simple without creating a domino effect on other rules
Please give a hypothetical scenario of domino effect rule changes required if the offense is allowed to retain possession at the point of fumbling, if through the endzone.
This post was edited on 7/25/22 at 2:09 pm
3
Posted on 7/25/22 at 2:14 pm to G2160
If the offense throws an interception the ball changes possession at the spot where the intercepting defender is downed. Unless it's in the endzone. Breaking the plane does not matter on a midfield first down if the player turns back, nor does it matter out of bounds. Only in the endzone does the play end immediately on breaking the plane. You get points for going there and not in the middle of the field.
The endzone is a special place with different rules.
The endzone is a special place with different rules.
This post was edited on 7/25/22 at 2:16 pm
Posted on 7/25/22 at 2:17 pm to G2160
quote:
Please give a hypothetical scenario of domino effect rule changes required if the offense is allowed to retain possession at the point of fumbling, if through the endzone.
Please provide the following:
1. A sensible "consequence" for a fumble through the end zone. Note - I do not consider solutions for "putting the ball at the 5" or some functional equivalent as a sensible consequence for a fumble through the end zone. It's arbitrary and has no basis in anything related to football. Hint - the change of possession that's in the rule books does have a basis in the logic of football, as has been explained many times.
2. In your own words, the differences between the side line and the end zone. Hint - there are some key differences between these boundary lines that could help your failure to grasp the rationale behind the current rules.
Posted on 7/25/22 at 2:33 pm to SteelerBravesDawg
quote:
College and Hugh school it's a flat 15 yd.penalty w/no automatic 1st down unless the yardage allows it.
Can't speak for HS but it's an automatic 1st in college. It can be 4th and 50 and if PI occurs on a quick slant it's an auto first.
Holding I think is a more egregious auto 1st down. Should just be 5 yards from the spot and replay the down.
Posted on 7/25/22 at 2:41 pm to Roscoe14
this is actually the best and smartest rule in all of football and the people that argue against it are some of the dumbest mother frickers on the planet
Posted on 7/25/22 at 4:42 pm to DrEdgeLSU
quote:
1. A sensible "consequence" for a fumble through the end zone. Note - I do not consider solutions for "putting the ball at the 5" or some functional equivalent as a sensible consequence for a fumble through the end zone. It's arbitrary and has no basis in anything related to football. Hint - the change of possession that's in the rule books does have a basis in the logic of football, as has been explained many times.
Anywhere else on the field, a fumble can not be used to advance the ball. If a player fumbles in the field of play and the ball advances into the endzone, then out of bounds, the ball can be spotted at the point of the fumble (if I were making the rules). This is not arbitrary, these are the rules for the rest of the field. This would not significantly alter the other rules of the game.
I know that the endzone is different from the field of play, I realize that this rule exists. It may have had a purpose 100 years ago, but here in 2022 it seems like having goofy rules for the sake of having goofy rules. If the ball is possessed in the field then fumbled into the endzone, it has been advanced. If it goes out of bounds without being recovered, it is counterintuitive to other rules regarding advancing the ball by fumbling.
This post was edited on 7/25/22 at 4:52 pm
Posted on 7/25/22 at 5:29 pm to G2160
quote:
Anywhere else on the field, a fumble can not be used to advance the ball.
Possessing the ball anywhere else on the field doesn't result in points either. And if the offense recovers the forward fumble outside of 2 minutes in the half, they get it at the point of recovery. So yes, a fumble DOES advance the ball.
And if you fumble at the 5, can't you also fumble at the 4? As in, is there a spot further along the field the ball can be advanced further? In the field of play, yes. In the endzone, there isn't any further spot you can advance the ball, it doesn't matter if it goes out near the front pylon or by the goalpost, it's all the same, the ball has been advanced as far as it can go, there's no benefit from fumbling in the endzone while there could be a benefit from fumbling forward near the sidelines (to gain extra yards).
The endzone is not the field of play. The field of play is the field in between both endzones and both out of bounds lines. All out of bounds is outside the field of play, but not everything outside of the field of play is out of bounds, because the endzone is also outside the field of play but not out of bounds.
So if the ball gets advanced outside the field of play by first going out of bounds, then it returns to the spot of the fumble. But if it first gets advanced outside the field of play by not going out of bounds (AKA the endzone) then there is no further advancement that can be achieved. Any play that ends in the endzone either results in points or a touchback, and since the offense never possessed the ball in the endzone to score points, it must be a touchback.
It follows all of the logic of the game. Fumbling out of bounds in the field of play is actually the exception, not the other way around, and they put that exception in to prevent exploiting the sidelines for extra yards when they're about to be tackled. Same with the other exception they put in when there's less than 2 minutes in the half. Normally when the offense recovers a forward fumble they get it at the spot of recovery and can also advance it, but less than 2 minutes in the half, only the player who initially fumbled it can recover it and still advance it or retain possession at the spot of recovery, any other offensive player recovers it and it cannot be advanced and goes back to the spot of the fumble. Those are the 2 exceptions. So the out of bounds rule in the endzone actually follows normal fumble procedure - it's an advancement of the ball.
Sorry for the tl;dr but it kind of annoys me how much this has to be explained
Posted on 7/25/22 at 6:39 pm to NawlinsTiger9
quote:It is better to have died as a small child than to fumble the football near the goal line
I agree. The end-zone is a special place. Don’t fumble there.
Posted on 7/25/22 at 6:43 pm to SteelerBravesDawg
quote:Only automatic first downs in HS are roughing the kicker, passer or holder
quote:
A pass interference penalty 4 yards downfield on 3rd and 16 giving the offense an automatic first down.
That's an NFL rule, baw. College and Hugh school it's a flat 15 yd.penalty w/no automatic 1st down unless the yardage allows it.
Posted on 7/25/22 at 7:53 pm to G2160
quote:
Anywhere else on the field, a fumble can not be used to advance the ball. If a player fumbles in the field of play and the ball advances into the endzone, then out of bounds, the ball can be spotted at the point of the fumble (if I were making the rules). This is not arbitrary, these are the rules for the rest of the field. This would not significantly alter the other rules of the game.
The argument you are making is false. A fumble can lead to advancement of the ball.
You are either a troll or just ignoring the facts presented.
Posted on 7/25/22 at 7:55 pm to G2160
I already told you they would haeto change the difinition of a touchback
then change the definition of a free kick and so on
then change the definition of a free kick and so on
Posted on 7/25/22 at 7:57 pm to DrEdgeLSU
Yahoo Sports jumped in on this last year, albeit from an NFL perspective.
The "worst rule in football" isn't wrong at all.
quote:
The very long version
If we’re going to spend another 1,500-plus words parsing out a situation that occurs only a handful of times a season, let’s begin by laying out the rule itself. The NFL’s official rulebook, Rule 8, Section 7, Article 3, Item 4, Subcategory 1 (yes, this is a true citation) states: “If a ball is fumbled in the field of play, and goes forward into the opponent’s end zone and over the end line or sideline, a touchback is awarded to the defensive team.”
OK. That explains what happens when a player fumbles the ball into the end zone. It doesn’t explain why. Why does the offense have to lose the ball entirely? If a player fumbles out of bounds on the 1-inch line, the offense keeps the ball. But 1 foot further and the ball goes over to the other team? Does that make sense?
Yes, when you consider:
1) what exactly the end zone constitutes
2) the Impetus Rule
3) the concept of “in touch.”
The "worst rule in football" isn't wrong at all.
Posted on 7/25/22 at 7:58 pm to G2160
you still have to change the definition of a touchback and the corresponing dominos
Posted on 7/25/22 at 8:00 pm to WaterLink
Excellent explanation 
Posted on 7/26/22 at 6:32 am to DrEdgeLSU
quote:
The argument you are making is false. A fumble can lead to advancement of the ball. You are either a troll or just ignoring the facts presented.
A fumble can lead to advancing the ball. You can fumble, it can be recovered and advanced.
A fumble can not advance the ball. You can not fumble forward out of bounds.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 6:42 am to Roscoe14
85 scholarship players
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:37 am to G2160
quote:
A fumble can lead to advancing the ball. You can fumble, it can be recovered and advanced.
A fumble can not advance the ball. You can not fumble forward out of bounds.
Funny, it seems I said just that.
quote:
A fumble can lead to advancement of the ball.
Oh, I did.
Anyway, your suggestion for returning the ball to the team that fumbled it away is moronic and defies logic as it relates to the game of football. In my view, this would be akin to not being penalized for an own goal in hockey or soccer, or not suffering the consequences of an error in baseball.
You fumbled the ball, either by force from the defense or just sloppy play, and you did it through the other team's end zone - you don't get a "re-do". You lost the ball in the other team's end zone.
Again, this suggests to me that you are willfully ignoring that the end zone is an area of the field unlike any other area, and you are willfully ignoring the purpose of the end zone itself. It's not a place for the offense to arrive; rather, it's a place that the defense is protecting. Have you ever noticed that at the coin toss, the question is asked "which goal do you want to defend?" They don't ask "which goal do you want to approach or score in?" The end zone is a protectorate of the defensive team. If you lose the ball out of it, you've lost it in the defense's territory.
Why should you get to keep it?
Posted on 7/26/22 at 11:50 am to DrEdgeLSU
I like the change of possession, but putting it at the 20 seems a bit too advantageous. We already have different touchback rules for kickoffs vs punts. Why not put the ball at the 10 or 5 after a fumble out of bounds touchback? Less of a reward than actually recovering but still punishes the team that fumbled.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 7:42 pm to Bunk Moreland
I read the article and was not impressed (although it was interesting and informative, so thanks for linking to it). It appeared to justify the rule based on:
1. It doesn't happen very often;
2. The offense failed in its duty to protect the ball (just as when it fumbles out of bounds in the field of play);
3. The rule has been around for a long time;
4. It could be (and used to be) a lot worse;
5. The defense needs a break; and
6. The end zone is some sort of mystical holy ground so the rules have to be different there.
Frankly, none of this gives a reason why it is fair for the defense to get possession when it didn't actually recover the ball.
1. It doesn't happen very often;
2. The offense failed in its duty to protect the ball (just as when it fumbles out of bounds in the field of play);
3. The rule has been around for a long time;
4. It could be (and used to be) a lot worse;
5. The defense needs a break; and
6. The end zone is some sort of mystical holy ground so the rules have to be different there.
Frankly, none of this gives a reason why it is fair for the defense to get possession when it didn't actually recover the ball.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News