9
- 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
Want to learn a new obscure NFL rule you'll never see happen again?
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:05 pm
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:05 pm
Watch the Saints games weekly.
Apparently if the QB's intent is to throw a forward pass, a ball thrown backwards is not a fumble.
Apparently if the QB's intent is to throw a forward pass, a ball thrown backwards is not a fumble.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:08 pm to JoeyBiscuits
That was mind numbing bad
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:09 pm to JoeyBiscuits
Apparently if don't intend to fumble, it's not a fumble. fricking bullshite
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:09 pm to JoeyBiscuits
If it wasn't a fumble (it was) then it was intentional grounding.
frick this
frick this
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:09 pm to JoeyBiscuits
In a league of dumb arse rules they might have topped themselves. The game is decided by where the ball goes. What the frick is intent.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:12 pm to The Boat
The amount of obscure NFL rules I've seen only ever called in Saints games is insane.
Incompletions are now completions in my opinion. Receiver's intent was to catch the ball.
The NFL is a joke.
Incompletions are now completions in my opinion. Receiver's intent was to catch the ball.
The NFL is a joke.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:12 pm to blackandgolddude
I don’t know how you can interpret that review as anything other than blatant rigging of an outcome.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:13 pm to blackandgolddude
quote:
If it wasn't a fumble (it was) then it was intentional grounding.
Y'all are ignoring how a defensive hit causes the errant pass
When that happens, you don't get grounding, either
Now, I don't think this was a forward pass, but that's another discussion
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:15 pm to JoeyBiscuits
quote:
The amount of obscure NFL rules I've seen only ever called in Saints games is insane.
Incompletions are now completions in my opinion. Receiver's intent was to catch the ball.
The NFL is a joke.
LSU too.
The jumping on an extra point rule was invoked once, ever, and it gave the warchickens a do over on a missed extra point.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Y'all are ignoring how a defensive hit causes the errant pass
Maybe but they said just the qb raising his arms made it a pass. Another nuance to their new rule. So if he starts to raise his arms while being hit, no matter where the ball goes or what happens, it's an incomplete pass.
This post was edited on 9/13/26 at 1:16 pm
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:16 pm to JoeyBiscuits
NFL is beyond bad
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:16 pm to csorre1
quote:
Maybe but they said just the qb raising his arms made it a pass
That's to make the fumble an incomplete pass, which I don't agree with
This is about it being a later (or intentional grounding). The hit by the defender caused that, which is where the "intent" language comes in.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:17 pm to Madking
Pretty clear fumble by the Lions there. I’m sure the refs will find a way to say he was still in possession.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:17 pm to spaghettioeauxs
quote:
I don’t know how you can interpret that review as anything other than blatant rigging of an outcome.
It's technically a rule that if the arm is coming forward, but the defensive hit alters the throw to go backwards, that's it's an incomplete pass.
So the call was correct per the ruling. The rule needs to be eliminated.
By that measure, a defensive players altering of the ball/play doesn't dictate a fumble, then interceptions shouldn't exist. It wasn't the intent of the QB to throw to the other team, so the opposing team's altering of the ball shouldn't count as a turnover.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:19 pm to csorre1
quote:the rule is, if a passer begins a forward throwing motion and a defender materially contacts his arm. It's a forward pass even if the ball goes backwards. I think it's stupid, but that is the rule
Maybe but they said just the qb raising his arms made it a pass.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:19 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
LSU too.
The jumping on an extra point rule was invoked once, ever, and it gave the warchickens a do over on a missed extra point.
Disconcerting signals was another one last year (or year before).
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:20 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Y'all are ignoring how a defensive hit causes the errant pass
quote:
Now, I don't think this was a forward pass, but that's another discussion
Looks like you’re contradicting yourself there.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:20 pm to UncleFestersLegs
quote:
I think it's stupid, but that is the rule
It's the verbiage they use that confuses me. It was the QB's intent to throw a forward pass. You can literally just make up whatever you want if the officials are going to start involving intent in every call.
This post was edited on 9/13/26 at 1:21 pm
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:22 pm to High C
quote:
Looks like you’re contradicting yourself there.
Not if you paid attention.
I think it was a fumble, which makes the discussion about a backwards pass irrelevant. The NFL disagrees on that part.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:24 pm to JoeyBiscuits
quote:
The NFL is a joke.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News