Football Fumbling out of the opponent's end zone - Page 4

lcarus · 09-26-2016, 08:46 AM

I've never been a fan of this rule. When Spencer Ware fumbled that ball by the pylon yesterday and the Jets got the ball, I was sure we were gonna blow the game. The Jets didn't deserve to get the ball 1st and 10 from the 20 yard line because of that play. They need to change the rule. If it goes out of the end zone, the fumbling team gets the ball at the spot of the fumble. The defense has to recover it in bounds to gain possession. Just my 2 cents.

Mr. Laz · 09-26-2016, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by luv

If the roles were reversed, would you have had a problem with it?

Yes, it's a stupid ****ing rule.

Probably the dumbest rule in the NFL.

You lose the ball without losing the ball and on top of that you give the opp 20 yards

unlurking · 09-26-2016, 04:55 PM

Just call it an "illegal forward fumble" or some such and penalize 5-10 yards and loss of down. Easy enough without causing a massive momentum shift on a single accidental play.

Chiefshrink · 09-26-2016, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

The defender hit aware and he clearly lost possession. The ball was sliding around in his hands as it hit the pylon.

Agreed. He did not have complete controlled possession when crossing the goal line.

**Dave Lane** · 09-26-2016, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manchambo

How about a compromise rule? Fumbling team gets the ball first and ten at the twenty.

I'd be OK if it was their own 20 that seems fair

**notorious** · 09-26-2016, 05:12 PM

Nothing wrong with the rule.

Hold on to the ****ing ball.

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 09-26-2016, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RealSNR

You fumbled them out of bounds into the end zone. The mods currently have them at their own 25 yard line

I don't know who did it this time, but that's ****ing hilarious!

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScareCrowe

Thanks for the kind words, it definitely sucked having my team ripped away, although given the state of the team I'm probably better off with the Chiefs anyway.

Plus I'm on the way West side of St Louis anyway so I can be at Arrowhead & watch an actual NFL team play & it's only about a 90 minute longer drive. Plus I have friends/relatives in KC that will let me crash at their place

You'll have a lot more fun rooting for this team. I think...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowser

Speaking of....

http://www.totalprosports.com/2016/0...tm_campaign=fb

That's an abortion. I admire the **** out of the guy for knowing the rule, but that's a ****ing abortion. NFL's right to choose...

Kiimo · 09-26-2016, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notorious

Nothing wrong with the rule.

Hold on to the ****ing ball.

Here's what's wrong. The other rules encourage you to reach out with the ball and hit the pylon with it.

It has nothing to do with securing the ball. If the ball hits the pylon before his foot is out it's a touchdown but if not it's a turnover going the other way? That's stupid.

Valiant · 09-26-2016, 05:22 PM

No. Hell no. Keep the rule the same. If the rule was different. Certain teams would abuse it near the goal line.
Ohh, you are about to be tackled short of a td. Fumble and kick the ball out of bounds past the pylon.

It would happen, and it would happen against the chiefs.
Right now this rule is one of the most accurate calls refs make. Leave it alone.

Kiimo · 09-26-2016, 05:24 PM

Dude that's dumb. How would that help a team? Intentionally fumbling it so you lose a down and go back? I don't follow you at all.

This rule is stupid.

**Ming the Merciless** · 09-26-2016, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valiant

No. Hell no. Keep the rule the same. If the rule was different. Certain teams would abuse it near the goal line.
Ohh, you are about to be tackled short of a td. Fumble and kick the ball out of bounds past the pylon.

It would happen, and it would happen against the chiefs.
Right now this rule is one of the most accurate calls refs make. Leave it alone.

just get rid of the touchback..put the ball on the 2 yd line and change possession.

solved.

Chief Pagan · 09-26-2016, 05:35 PM

I would prefer to see the offense keep possession where the fumble happened. It could make players more aggressive reaching the ball out but I don't see that as big of deal. I guess if you wanted to discourage that you could have some sort of penalty to back them up a few yards.

Kiimo · 09-26-2016, 05:42 PM

Simple. Fumbling the ball into the endzone without the other team recovering results in a loss of down and give the ball to the team that fumbled. If a defense doesn't recover a fumble I see no reason why they should be awarded the ball. The endzone rules for touchbacks are stupid in this case.

Chief Pagan · 09-26-2016, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowser

Speaking of....

http://www.totalprosports.com/2016/0...tm_campaign=fb

I saw a replay of that. That was great. Surprised nobody had tried to before.

I don't like the rules for either punts or kickoffs going out of bounds.

My preference:

If the ball lands in bound and then goes out, the receiving team gets possession at that location (kick offs and punts). If it lands in bounds the receiving team had a chance to catch and advance the ball. If they don't, that is on them.

If the ball lands out of bounds then the receiving team gets the ball 25 yards from the line of scrimmage of the kick (kick off or punts). I hate the rule where if the punt goes out the ref tries to guestimate where it happened and the receiving team has no chance to advance.

If the receiving team catches/touches the ball when they are standing partially (or totally) out-of-bounds, they get the ball at that spot. The ball has to make contact with the ground, out of bounds, for it to be a penalty on the kicker. If the receiving team wants to touch it before it hits the ground, that is on them.

Valiant · 09-26-2016, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiimosabi

Dude that's dumb. How would that help a team? Intentionally fumbling it so you lose a down and go back? I don't follow you at all.

This rule is stupid.

5 seconds on the clock, 5 yardline, no timeouts, two defenders in front of you. Purposely fumble ball foward and ball out the endzone.

Current rule. Defense gets ball.
If we change it to offense keeps possession. They would get the ball back at the five or one with a couple seconds.
You could say intentional fumbles do not count but that is ref perspective. We already see preferential treatment with rules. There was a similar rule to kicking the ball because teams could abuse it. If there is a way to abuse a rule, certain teams will do it. Just like the cap.

I could also see getting tackled from behind or ripped from behind and going out of endzone ala newton and other highlight rips.

Just dont fumble the ball.

Kiimo · 09-26-2016, 05:58 PM

I fail to see how intentionally fumbling the ball with 5 seconds on the clock helps you. Are you saying chuck it into the endzone to stop the clock? Simple. A fumble into the endzone doesn't stop the clock. Problem solved.

09-26-2016, 08:46 AM
lcarus Everybody Lies. Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: 22 Acacia Avenue Casino cash: $1949928	Fumbling out of the opponent's end zone I've never been a fan of this rule. When Spencer Ware fumbled that ball by the pylon yesterday and the Jets got the ball, I was sure we were gonna blow the game. The Jets didn't deserve to get the ball 1st and 10 from the 20 yard line because of that play. They need to change the rule. If it goes out of the end zone, the fumbling team gets the ball at the spot of the fumble. The defense has to recover it in bounds to gain possession. Just my 2 cents.
Posts: 17,331

09-26-2016, 04:55 PM	#47
unlurking MVP Join Date: Aug 2003 Casino cash: $7737309	Just call it an "illegal forward fumble" or some such and penalize 5-10 yards and loss of down. Easy enough without causing a massive momentum shift on a single accidental play. __________________
Posts: 10,620

09-26-2016, 05:12 PM	#50
notorious Supporter Join Date: May 2005 Location: Who knows? Casino cash: $3015884	Nothing wrong with the rule. Hold on to the ****ing ball.
Posts: 83,208

09-26-2016, 05:22 PM	#53
Valiant Valiant 'The Thread Killer' Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Kansas City Casino cash: $6472380	No. Hell no. Keep the rule the same. If the rule was different. Certain teams would abuse it near the goal line. Ohh, you are about to be tackled short of a td. Fumble and kick the ball out of bounds past the pylon. It would happen, and it would happen against the chiefs. Right now this rule is one of the most accurate calls refs make. Leave it alone.
Posts: 18,346

09-26-2016, 05:24 PM	#54
Kiimo MVP Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Studio City, CA Casino cash: $4108742	Dude that's dumb. How would that help a team? Intentionally fumbling it so you lose a down and go back? I don't follow you at all. This rule is stupid.
Posts: 12,533

09-26-2016, 05:35 PM	#56
Chief Pagan Sometimes it's black and white Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: California Casino cash: $3844900	I would prefer to see the offense keep possession where the fumble happened. It could make players more aggressive reaching the ball out but I don't see that as big of deal. I guess if you wanted to discourage that you could have some sort of penalty to back them up a few yards.
Posts: 6,110

09-26-2016, 05:42 PM	#57
Kiimo MVP Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Studio City, CA Casino cash: $4108742	Simple. Fumbling the ball into the endzone without the other team recovering results in a loss of down and give the ball to the team that fumbled. If a defense doesn't recover a fumble I see no reason why they should be awarded the ball. The endzone rules for touchbacks are stupid in this case.
Posts: 12,533

09-26-2016, 05:58 PM	#60
Kiimo MVP Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Studio City, CA Casino cash: $4108742	I fail to see how intentionally fumbling the ball with 5 seconds on the clock helps you. Are you saying chuck it into the endzone to stop the clock? Simple. A fumble into the endzone doesn't stop the clock. Problem solved.
Posts: 12,533