Why are fumbles out of the end zone lost possessions?

[Prison Bitch]

Football experts: What is the rationale behind giving the defense the ball via touchback after a fumble out of the end zone? Yesterday as we all know Bryce Brown was stripped as he was about to cross the goal line. The Buffalo player did not recover (he was the only one even with a chance) and it was Chiefs ball.


It makes perfect sense to lose possession fumbling out of YOUR end zone but why punish the offense for doing it so close to scoring? If you want to punish them then give Buffalo the ball at the 20 and say "Close but try again".


Some will say they believe the Chiefs should be rewarded but why? We didn't recover the ball either. And if Brown was stripped and it veered to the pylon a foot before the goal line before being out, they keep it. So we aren't rewarded in that case.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It is a stupid rule. The fumbling team should regain possession at the spot of the fumble.

I figure there's some reason for this rule, and it's probably pretty arcane but valid. On the face, it's sure an odd one, though.

I bet that there's some scenario where an offensive team can gain an unethical advantage by batting the ball out of the end zone. I'm just not sure what it is.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Dayze

holding is one of the most insanely called penalties.
i have no idea what is, and what is not holding anymore.
I see plays with flagarant holds, and no calls (jerseys being pulled, shoulder pads being ripped off). then see other plays where a guy slightly tugs on jersey, and it's called.

same with DPI. I have no idea any longer

I can explain DPI now. Defensive pass interference occurs whenever there is contact between a receiver and a defender. Any type of contact. Regardless of who makes the contact. It is the defender's responsibility to run away from any receiver who attempts to initiate contact.

Of course, that's before the catch. After the catch, contact is allowed as long as it's not above numerals of the jersey or below the numerals of the jersey, and as long as the contact is deemed gentle.

Of course, they tighten these rules up for Peyton Manning's receivers, but this is the baseline.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by MTG#10

So there should be no penalty other than a loss of down for fumbling out of the endzone? What if the ball carrier felt himself starting to be tackled short of the goal line and purposely fumbled it to his team mate standing in the endzone for a TD? That's why the rule is in place, its not stupid at all.

Maybe that's the reason, though it seems a bit harsh to stop that. But I guess if there's no penalty for just throwing the ball forward, maybe it's to a runner's advantage to just fling it forward from the 20 or wherever hard enough that it'll go out if his guy can't get to it. That seems a little far-fetched, though, considering how much coaches hate even conservative laterals.

I bet it dates from the 30s when fans would take the footballs or something.

[morphius]

I always looked at it as following the same rules as a punt or kick off out of end zone. The offensive team gives up/loses possession of the ball and it follows the same rule, touch back for what was the defensive team.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Maybe that's the reason, though it seems a bit harsh to stop that. But I guess if there's no penalty for just throwing the ball forward, maybe it's to a runner's advantage to just fling it forward from the 20 or wherever hard enough that it'll go out if his guy can't get to it. That seems a little far-fetched, though, considering how much coaches hate even conservative laterals.

I bet it dates from the 30s when fans would take the footballs or something.

It has to be a change of possession. If it weren't, it would count as a score.

[kysirsoze]

Originally Posted by Sully

Football is full of weird rules, anyway.

Think of this, they eyeball the spot of the ball after every down. I mean, how perfect could it be.
But when it's short yardage, they bring out chains (that were placed on the sideline by eyeballing) to measure the spot of the ball to the millimeter.

Originally Posted by Sully

Also, did you know the pole isn't a first down? It's the end of the last link of the chain.

Also, who is to say they are holding the first down chains perpendicularly to the yard lines when measuring?

The whole charade of chains and measurement is hilarious. Considering how tightly they measure it, it's basically arbitrary anyway. It's mostly a way for coaches to stall to make tough decisions.

[kysirsoze]

Originally Posted by Groves

Once the ball is loose in the end zone you have this scenario under the current rule.

If the offense recovers, score.
If the defense recovers, touchback.
If the ball somehow makes it out of bounds, touchback.

Without the current rule, the way most of you are talking, it would be like this:

If the offense recovers, score.
If the defense recovers, touchback.
If the ball somehow makes it out of bounds, returns to the offense at the x yard line?


Now, given the relative difficulty of obtaining the ball verses the relative ease of causing that ball to leave the end zone, you can see how the current rule takes away a major advantage of the offense.

It current rule basically says, "You wanna fumble in the end zone? Fine, you even get to keep the points if you recover it, but no funny business or we're giving it to the other team."

It's a pretty fair rule.

I agree with this post.

[BigMeatballDave]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I'd rather the NFL just have a consistent rule. It all goes back to the Holy Roller play.

It is consistent.

Have you ever seen a ball go out of the EZ and not be called a touchback or a safety?

Sure, it's not consistent with fumbles, but EZ rules are different than the regular field of play.

There is nothing wrong with this rule, and I don't ever recall seeing anyone ever complain about it.

[beach tribe]

Nothing in the end zone is the same as it is anywhere else on the field. Why should fumbling be any different?

[beach tribe]

Originally Posted by BigMeatballDave

It is consistent.

Have you ever seen a ball go out of the EZ and not be called a touchback or a safety?

Sure, it's not consistent with fumbles, but EZ rules are different than the regular field of play.

There is nothing wrong with this rule, and I don't ever recall seeing anyone ever complain about it.

Beat me by a minute.

[BigRichard]

Originally Posted by Groves

Once the ball is loose in the end zone you have this scenario under the current rule.

If the offense recovers, score.
If the defense recovers, touchback.
If the ball somehow makes it out of bounds, touchback.

Without the current rule, the way most of you are talking, it would be like this:

If the offense recovers, score.
If the defense recovers, touchback.
If the ball somehow makes it out of bounds, returns to the offense at the x yard line?


Now, given the relative difficulty of obtaining the ball verses the relative ease of causing that ball to leave the end zone, you can see how the current rule takes away a major advantage of the offense.

It current rule basically says, "You wanna fumble in the end zone? Fine, you even get to keep the points if you recover it, but no funny business or we're giving it to the other team."

It's a pretty fair rule.

^^^this^^^

[CapsLockKey]

Because if you fumble a ball forward 10 yards or more anywhere else on the field, 9 times out of 10 it will probably be recovered by the defense.

[crazycoffey]

The goalline is a special line, break the plane and fumble its a score, fumble before breaking the plain its a live ball, if the offense falls on it it's still a score (even though there's foward progression for the offense, bs). Defense falls on it or it goes out of bounds it's a touchback. The Chiefs have been on the negative side several times, good play by Parker. The end

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

why is the stopping the clock with a quick spike not intentional grounding?

this is an excellent point.

[ClevelandBronco]

Originally Posted by BigMeatballDave

There are a ton more idiotic rules in football alone.

My opponent scores a touchdown and I walk over and smack him upside the head, right on the ear hole. The ref sees it and throws a flag for unnecessary roughness which will be assessed on the kickoff. My opponent tees up at the 50 and kicks it through the end zone. I take possession at the 20.

Now that's idiotic.

I should be penalized from the end of the return instead. If I advance the ball short of the 30, it's half the distance. If I return the ball for a TD it's called out to my opponent's 15.