- 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 "worst rule in football" isn't wrong at all.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:16 pm
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:16 pm
I would have bumped Reauxl's thread from last week, but it looks like it got nuked. I had to laugh when I got in the car at one point on Monday I heard Greenie say "we'll discuss the worst rule in sports coming up next," then I flipped to Barstool and some guy says "in what world does this rule make any f-ing sense?" 
LINK
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.”
LINK
33
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:22 pm to Bunk Moreland
maybe I'm just a 'tard, but I read the article and the rule still sucks
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:22 pm to Bunk Moreland
I don’t mind treating the end zones as sacred ground so to say
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:27 pm to JetsetNuggs
If you need to wax poetic like this to justify it, it's probably a dumb rule.
quote:
“Some say the NFL rule is too punitive, that the offense shouldn't lose possession in a situation like that,” says NFL historian Dan Daly. “But I kind of like the idea of the field being finite — and that when you fumble out of the end zone it's like it drops off the face of the earth. Gone forever. A fumble between the goal lines, that's different; you're still in the field of play. But they don't call it the end line for nothing.”
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:28 pm to Bunk Moreland
I think the bigger question is that in the NFL if the offense fumbles the ball and goes out of bounds forward from the spot of the fumble the ball is placed back at the spot of the fumble. Meaning the offense can't gain yards during a loose ball, but as you stated, if they fumble the ball and it goes into the endzone and out of bounds the defense is awarded the ball plus 20 yards?
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:28 pm to Bunk Moreland
Because we've always done it this, isn't a good excuse.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:36 pm to Bunk Moreland
None of that makes this retarded arse rule any better.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:37 pm to noles25
The rule should be easily applied to fumbles in the EZ.
The offense cannot advance a fumble. Period. End of story. Problem solved and we stop rewarding the defense for an offensive player trying to stretch the ball out.
The offense cannot advance a fumble. Period. End of story. Problem solved and we stop rewarding the defense for an offensive player trying to stretch the ball out.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:38 pm to Bunk Moreland
Wrong. It sucks.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:41 pm to Bunk Moreland
Everyone understands the rule whether or not they agree with it. That being said even though everyone understands the implication of fumbling into the end zone, players STILL extend the ball out in traffic exposing it to be knocked out or even just dropped causing a touch back.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:42 pm to Bunk Moreland
The worst rule is when a qb throws a pick but gets bailed out with roughing the passer. The ball already left the qb’s hand so not getting a late hit would not have prevented the int. The defense should get the ball and move back 15 yards.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:42 pm to noles25
quote:
I think the bigger question is that in the NFL if the offense fumbles the ball and goes out of bounds forward from the spot of the fumble the ball is placed back at the spot of the fumble. Meaning the offense can't gain yards during a loose ball
If the offense recovers it in the field of play they get the extra yards (except on 4th down and inside 2 minutes for obvious reasons, the trade off between potentially fumbling forward to gain extra yards and the threat of a turnover is diminished in desperate situations). So the offense CAN get extra yards on loose ball situations. The reason it stays at the spot of the fumble on OOB fumbles is because fumbling out of bounds doesn't give the defense a chance to recover so it would be cheap extra yards so that's why that exception is put in place.
Once the loose ball crosses the endzone though, it's no longer the field of play and that exception is lifted. People like to think of the endzone as an exception to the rule, but instead think of fumbling OOB in the field of play as the actual exception to normal fumbling rules.
This post was edited on 1/21/21 at 2:42 pm
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:43 pm to Bunk Moreland
This is like the one rule in football that favors the defense. Let it be
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:53 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
Does that make sense?
Its part of the reasoning behind its cousin, the Holy Roller rule.
Yes teams used to purposefully fumble the ball forward into the end zone in desperation in hopes they'd recover it.
Since you can't trust NFL teams the touch back makes sense as a disincentive to cheat.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 12:58 pm to PeteRose
quote:
The ball already left the qb’s hand so not getting a late hit would not have prevented the int.
Not true at all.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 1:00 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
This isn’t really a rule more how a rule is called,
The joe flacco pass interference needs to axed. QB takes a shot down field with an inaccurate ball, WR adjusts and runs in the CB. The offense gets rewarded with a flag
The joe flacco pass interference needs to axed. QB takes a shot down field with an inaccurate ball, WR adjusts and runs in the CB. The offense gets rewarded with a flag
Posted on 1/21/21 at 1:04 pm to Bunk Moreland
Basically every rule is skewed to help the offense. So while it doesn't make a load of sense, I have no problem with a wacky rule that actually benefits the defense.
Plus it's not like it's some random rule that nobody knows. Every player in the league knows what happens if you fumble through the end zone. Protect the ball so it doesn't happen, or at least pick your moments to take the risk of sticking it out.
Plus it's not like it's some random rule that nobody knows. Every player in the league knows what happens if you fumble through the end zone. Protect the ball so it doesn't happen, or at least pick your moments to take the risk of sticking it out.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 1:04 pm to MF Doom
I don't like the horse-collar tackle rule. Defender is running at full speed trying to grab what he can to get runner down. Seems artificial penalization of defense.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 1:06 pm to Bunk Moreland
I'm fine with the rule
Posted on 1/21/21 at 1:07 pm to Bunk Moreland
Dont fumble near the goal-line 
Almost every time this rule comes into play is when a player, who already has a first down, is attempting to squeeze out a half of a yard towards the pylon holding the ball with one hand. Risk vs. reward its a very stupid decision but players keep doing it.
Almost every time this rule comes into play is when a player, who already has a first down, is attempting to squeeze out a half of a yard towards the pylon holding the ball with one hand. Risk vs. reward its a very stupid decision but players keep doing it.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News