Fumble out of bounds in the end zone

[jerseyhawksfan79]

So they can get a do-over at the 1, 2, 3, 1/2 yard line, etc and that's OK?

No, if it's fumbled through the EZ.

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

No doubt something to be said for that line of thinking and Stefanski said he does teach his guys not to reach for the pylon.

Doesn't mean it's wrong to think it's a bad rule and could be changed. But, sure, as long as it's still a rule then don't reach for the pylon to avoid it happening.

It's a risk/reward type play.

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

OK...but the team that won needed a lucky bounce to win and they had all game to win without needing one.

Well yes, the team did win cause of a lucky bounce but we're talking about a season and losing out on the playoffs cause of a fumble through the EZ.

 

[Manster7588]

How about the offense keeps the ball, loss of down, at the 35?



I mean their 35, so if it was 3rd down, its now 4th and goal 65 yards away.

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

How are they being rewarded here as opposed to any other fumble on the field when they lose the ball out of bounds where the defense does not recover? Offenses already penalize themselves by fumbling the ball backwards and recovering it, because they lose that yardage and the down. If the defense recovers, they really penalized themselves. If the offense fumbles the ball and it goes backwards out of their endzone they are penalized 2 points and the opposing team gets the football. If you fumble backwards, you lose yardage and down, if you fumble forward and get the ball back, you lose the gained yardage at point of fumble and it goes back to the spot of the fumble. Everything about this rule penalizes the offense.

That play with Higgins should have been bring the ball back to the point of fumble, at the half yard line, continue to next play. They should not be penalized for the fumble if the defense didn't recover, he was already penalized by not getting the TD on the play because it was knocked lose, never mind the personal foul that was committed against Higgins when the defender led with his helmet into the head and neck area of Higgins causing the fumble.

Bring the ball back to the spot of the fumble if it was fumbled forward. If it is fumbled backwards, it is where ever the ball goes out of bounds is where the play continues. In this case, it was fumbled forward without recovery by the defense, so it should have been Browns ball at the half yard line.

So the offense screws up at the goal line and should get the ball back because of other types of fumbles? The defenses in this league are already handcuffed with so many rules that favor the offenses but lets help out the offense some more on their own screwups.

 

[dtgold88]

No, if it's fumbled through the EZ.

Not what I'm saying...point is you don't mind do-overs if NOT fumbled out of EZ, no matter where?

 

[dtgold88]

It's a risk/reward type play.

Yep...and I agree with stefanski, as long as it's still the same rule the risk does not outweigh the reward.

 

[Manster7588]

Not what I'm saying...point is you don't mind do-overs if NOT fumbled out of EZ, no matter where?

So are you trying to say every fumble should be a turnover?

 

[dtgold88]

So are you trying to say every fumble should be a turnover?

Not at all.

 

[NWPATSFAN]

actually think many cases is fair. Seems like often this happens when the guy reaches for the pylon and just loses it. Many does not = majority, though.

Not when compared to the number of running TDs scored in a season. You literally have this fumble through the EZ a couple times a season. Semantics.

 

[fastforward]

Why not treat incomplete passes the same way. If it's an incomplete pass out of your own endzone it's incomplete. If it's an incomplete pass at your own 10-yard line it's incomplete. If it's an incomplete pass at the opponent's 10-yard line it's incomplete. If it's an incomplete pass in the opponent's endzone it's an interception. Anyone want that?

Anyone?

Me neither.

 

[Manster7588]

Not at all.

So all fumbles that go out of bounds?

 

[broncosmitty]

already makes multiple worse in just the nba

don’t get me into the arbitrariness of the blue line or icing in hockey or pitchers still hitting in baseball.

It’s the worst.


Baseball doing away with the entire 40 man roster being eligible each day in September handed off the torch.

 

[Wazmankg]

Well that's not a very good argument; you're calling a very boneheaded mistake a "hustle play".... strongly disagree with that statement.

Right.. that's not a hustle play. It's a stupid play and the defense should be rewarded for being in position to make the ball carrier take a stupid chance like that.

 

[dtgold88]

Not when compared to the number of running TDs scored in a season. You literally have this fumble through the EZ a couple times a season. Semantics.

Ok, but the "many" I mentioned only includes times the fumble goes through the EZ. Wasn't talking comparatively to all plays.

Something you brought up might be why they don't change the rule.....doesn't happen all that much.

 

[dtgold88]

So all fumbles that go out of bounds?

nope

 

[Manster7588]

nope

Then please explian, or am I confusing you with someone else

 

[dtgold88]

Then please explian, or am I confusing you with someone else

Think we are on the same side with this. I think O should keep the ball on this play. Maybe at spot of foul or perhaps further back.

 

[Manster7588]

Think we are on the same side with this. I think O should keep the ball on this play. Maybe at spot of foul or perhaps further back.

I'm good with the current rule. I thought I saw someone suggest every fumble out of bounds go to the D, and saw you defending your stance, and got you mixed with him.
I'd be OK if they let the O keep the ball, but I think it's right as is.

 

[dtgold88]

I'm good with the current rule. I thought I saw someone suggest every fumble out of bounds go to the D, and saw you defending your stance, and got you mixed with him.
I'd be OK if they let the O keep the ball, but I think it's right as is.

Happens so little, not gonna lose sleep over it, just seems a D should have to recover a fumble to get possession. Especially knowing could be a matter of inches (just behind or just in front of the pylon) that swings this to the D.