- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
0
Posted on 12/18/18 at 6:34 am to bonethug0180
quote:
Or why not give the ball to the defense on any fumble out of bounds? Why only when it goes forward into the end zone?
Out of bounds is neutral territory.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 6:53 am to bonethug0180
quote:
The crazy thing is the rule is you cannot fumble the ball forward, so if it goes out of bounds past the spot of the fumble it gets moved back to where the fumble occurred.
You've brought awareness to the most cogent thought on this point. Forward fumble out of bounds by offense, without defensive players taking control of the ball brings the ball back to the point of fumble.
Then again, the game of football was invented to be a game, a fun game with a set of rules. It's turned into a Phariseerical event of laws.
This post was edited on 12/18/18 at 8:13 am
Posted on 12/18/18 at 7:08 am to BestBanker
The problem in this case was there was no definitive angle to show it went out of the end zone. Could have just as easily been out of bounds before the pylon. It's a judgment call in that case and it gives the refs even more power to change the course of a game.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 7:24 am to liquid rabbit
For this reason, move the ball back to the 3 yard line or spot of the fumble, whichever is furthest back. That would prevent endless replays looking to see if it was fumbled or went out at the 1 inch line or the 1 yard line.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 7:25 am to Zephyrius
quote:
No one would be talking about this if the roles were reversed and benefited the Saints for the win.
False. I’ve said it for years. Every time it happens. For better or worse. Maybe it’s everyone except me. Doubtful, but you’re wrong regardless.
And how other plays in the end zone are treated has zero bearing. This isn’t physics, it’s a game. Clocking the ball is literally intentional grounding. But it’s not. The rules can be whatever they want them to be. They moved the kickoff, moved field goals, added a two point conversion, changed OT, etc.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 7:41 am to MarcusQuinn
As others have stated, as soon as this rule results in a post season Saints victory it will be changed. Especially if the victory is over one of the media darlings.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 7:41 am to THRILLHO
What is absolutely insane is that on top of giving the other team the ball you then just give them a extra twenty yards to boot.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 7:41 am to MarcusQuinn
Isn’t this rule in place because the Raiders or someone would fumble the ball into the end zone to be at the goal line or something? Why was this rule put in place?
Posted on 12/18/18 at 7:48 am to liquid rabbit
quote:
The problem in this case was there was no definitive angle to show it went out of the end zone.
The pylon cam clearly showed this.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 8:19 am to stelly1025
quote:
This rule has always existed and as a ball carrier you should know that if you stick the ball out to cross the plane that you better dam well secure the football especially if you are near the sideline. This happened to Colston a few years ago and to a few other WR's and RB's around the league. These players know this rule exists and to be honest I like the rule. This is one of the few rules left that benefit the Defense. So in short players need to secure the ball especially by the goalline and if they put the the ball out to break the plane than they better dam well be across. I am glad this happened against a bad team rather than in the playoffs and I am sure everyone has got the message, don't do that.
Yeah I agree with all of the, you can't tackle and land on the QB stuff going on, I'm fine with throwing a bone to defenses.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 8:21 am to pensacola
quote:
For this reason, move the ball back to the 3 yard line or spot of the fumble, whichever is furthest back. That would prevent endless replays looking to see if it was fumbled or went out at the 1 inch line or the 1 yard line.
This is the best idea
Posted on 12/18/18 at 8:38 am to Zephyrius
quote:
No one would be talking about this if the roles were reversed and benefited the Saints for the win.
I wouldn't complain if we got the ball like this, but I absolutely, and always have, question why this rule exists everytime it happens.
And no one yet has given an actual reason why it exists other than "end zone special", which sounds stupid as frick.
I don't care that it happened to us. I care that it seems to have no logic to it when every other time the ball goes back to the spot of the fumble.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 8:45 am to bonethug0180
Same here as it has never made sense. You run a KO back 90 yards with no defenders around you doing anything you drop the ball and kick it through the end zone at the last second.
Result?
Hey you lose possession and the other team gets the ball with a added free twenty yards to boot for doing jack sh!t.
Result?
Hey you lose possession and the other team gets the ball with a added free twenty yards to boot for doing jack sh!t.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 9:56 am to Eighteen
quote:
Emoticons
quote:
Any other place on the field, a sack is just a loss of yards and a down. In the end zone, the other team gets 2 points and the ball back
Except for one difference...in your instance, a team has possession of the football.
In the rule, no one has possession and it is awarded to the defense for not recovering it.
My .02
Posted on 12/18/18 at 6:00 pm to moneyg
quote:
The same reason moving the ball past the 1 yard line does nothing, but moving it into the end zone results in a TD.
Requires possession.
quote:
The end zone is a different part of the field and the rules surrounding it don't (and shouldn't) be equivalent to the other parts of the field.
To what extent? Any extent? That's a pretty meaningless statement. Obviously some rules are in fact the same. You, of course, haven't actually made an argument in favor of why it is prudent for the current rule to exist over the alternative.
It is my opinion, and always has been, that a fumble out the side of the endzone resulting in a touchback is rather nonsensical. The ball has not been possessed by the defense. Fumbling it out of the back of the endzone is a different scenario in that the ball exits out of the field of play due to the field reaching it's end. At any other point on the field, play would continue until someone possessed the ball, but obviously that can't occur out the back of the endzone. The sideline rule can and should be an extension of the sideline rule as it pertains to the entirety of the field. That's my position based on what I believe to be a sound and reasonable extension of the existing rules governing the game itself in the field of play. Obviously players are going to be extending for the ball for they goalline. That that kind of standard football act, diving for a distance marker, suddenly gets punished as a turnover at it's most important destination over a play that is flukey and at no other point on the field would be punished whatsoever, is somewhat absurd.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 6:10 pm to bonethug0180
Yes.
Another inconsistent application of rules.
I’ve always disliked this rule and will continue to do so even if it benefits the Saints.
It is a terrible rule.
Another inconsistent application of rules.
I’ve always disliked this rule and will continue to do so even if it benefits the Saints.
It is a terrible rule.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 6:19 pm to THRILLHO
I say treat it like a safety. Award the offense 2 points and make the defense kick off to them (or punt).
It is kind of like being tackled in your own endzone.
You give up that much ground and don't force a turnover per se, no way you should be rewarded the same as if the D recovered the fumble.
2 points and defense has to kick off from the 20. Jmo.
It is kind of like being tackled in your own endzone.
You give up that much ground and don't force a turnover per se, no way you should be rewarded the same as if the D recovered the fumble.
2 points and defense has to kick off from the 20. Jmo.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 8:53 pm to ChewyDante
quote:
To what extent? Any extent? That's a pretty meaningless statement. Obviously some rules are in fact the same. You, of course, haven't actually made an argument in favor of why it is prudent for the current rule to exist over the alternative.
There is no argument needed. It's arbitrary. Your need to find n equivalence for how things work in the end zone vs other parts of the field is faulty.
For example, if you cross the plane of the goal line, it's a TD.
If you cross the plane of the 40 yard line, you aren't guaranteed the 40 yard line. OMG, OMG, why are things different. Why doesn't the player have to be tackled in the end zone, or gain forward progress in the end zone like they do all over the field.
Your point is a stupid one. And, frankly, once you realize that there is no intended symmetry, the rule as it stands is the better one.
Posted on 12/18/18 at 9:03 pm to moneyg
It's not so much about symmetry as it is about a complete reversal of possession for an absolutely arbitrary reason, whereas the rule for fumbling works fine when removing the "fumbled into the endzone" part of it.
Unlike that of the example of a safety, because that does not work when applying the standard rules.
You cannot spot the ball in the end zone. You can move a ball fumbled forward into the endzone back to the original spot of the fumble.
There is no good reason, and you saying because endzone so special or it is because it is because it's arbitrary is asinine. An inch difference makes it from your ball to their ball for no real reason.
No one can name one logical reason for the change of possession. That makes it a stupid fricking rule.
Unlike that of the example of a safety, because that does not work when applying the standard rules.
You cannot spot the ball in the end zone. You can move a ball fumbled forward into the endzone back to the original spot of the fumble.
There is no good reason, and you saying because endzone so special or it is because it is because it's arbitrary is asinine. An inch difference makes it from your ball to their ball for no real reason.
No one can name one logical reason for the change of possession. That makes it a stupid fricking rule.
This post was edited on 12/18/18 at 9:04 pm
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News