Jump to content
NBC Sports Edge Forums

The fumble out the endzone rule


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Having watched this game for over 40 years I agree with the "stick with the rule" crowd in here.  As harsh as it is - there is no other remedy that makes sense in the context of the rest of the r

I found the below on this, if you are interested.  NFL senior vice president of officiating explains why the rule is the way it is - “Because the goal line is involved — and this is a consistent

For context, I'm a Browns fan.  In my opinion, this rule is perfectly fine as is, and it's a good balance between risk vs. reward on stretching the ball out at the goal-line.  Every time I've ever see

1 minute ago, lolcopter said:

Because they were the last team to have possession while the ball was still in the field of play which is a very important distinction from the endzone where the play is immediately over upon crossing the goal line WHILE IN POSSESSION of the ball. If you lose possession of the ball in the area where you are supposed to be scoring, you should not under any circumstances get a "redo" from the 15 or 20 or whatever. You guys are rewarding bad offense with these suggestions. You don't want to give the ball to the other team? Then don't dive for the pylon and drop the ball in the endzone.

It's entirely consistent with the rules with regard to the ball in play. If the QB took a snap, and threw it directly out of bounds five yards behind the line of scrimmage, that is effectively the same thing as fumbling out of bounds and the offense would retain possession where the ball went out. Similarly, since the fumbled ball cannot be advanced, the offense cannot retain possession in the opponent's endzone! That is the distinct difference between field of play and endzone. It's not arbitrary rules with regard to fumbling, these are guidelines with regard to the ball as it is in play.

Moving the line of scrimmage for a redo because someone screwed up is completely ridiculous.

They aren't fumbling in the end zone though, they are fumbling at the 1 inch line for arguments sake which is in the field of play. Hence they are the last team to have possession to use your words. You cant fumble in the end zone as once you cross the goal line with the ball its a TD.

 

I am very confused about this "the ball cannot be advanced" thing. The ball cannot be advanced on a fumble regardless of if it is in the end zone or not.

 

Moving the line of scrimmage BACK thus penalizing the team that fumbles is crazy? isn't that the point of why you like the change of possession rule? to penalize the fumbling team? Its the same concept not sure why that's ridiculous? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost every rule made or modified is made to help out the offense.

helmet to helmet, pass interference, roughing the passer, Qb sliding rules. 

I’m fine with letting the defense have one that benefits them for once. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, lolcopter said:

t's entirely consistent with the rules with regard to the ball in play. If the QB took a snap, and threw it directly out of bounds five yards behind the line of scrimmage, that is effectively the same thing as fumbling out of bounds and the offense would retain possession where the ball went out. Similarly, since the fumbled ball cannot be advanced, the offense cannot retain possession in the opponent's endzone! That is the distinct difference between field of play and endzone. It's not arbitrary rules with regard to fumbling, these are guidelines with regard to the ball as it is in play.

So now the same QB throws a pass a throws it through the end zone, without being caught.

Incomplete pass or a touchback and turnover?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boudewijn said:

So now the same QB throws a pass a throws it through the end zone, without being caught.

Incomplete pass or a touchback and turnover?

I think he was referencing a backwards pass just didn't specify 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boudewijn said:

So now the same QB throws a pass a throws it through the end zone, without being caught.

Incomplete pass or a touchback and turnover?

Incomplete because it was a forward pass

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Lamont Sanford said:

The play yesterday

Wrong thread?

The Texans thread is now the Watson thread and the Watson thread the fumble thread ;)

Edited by Boudewijn
Link to post
Share on other sites

@kmoore1521makes a good point about it not being a fumble unless it is actually fumbled in the field of play. But somehow when that fumble is advanced through the endzone that is a touchback for the opposing team and loss of possession.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lolcopter said:

Incomplete because it was a forward pass

Right. So to me it makes sense if that's just an incomplete pass, and if a fumble out of bounds is just a fumble, then a fumble through the end zone should also be just a fumble.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kmoore1521 said:

They aren't fumbling in the end zone though, they are fumbling at the 1 inch line for arguments sake which is in the field of play. Hence they are the last team to have possession to use your words. You cant fumble in the end zone as once you cross the goal line with the ball its a TD.

Good point. The Browns were the last team to have possession, but the ball did not go out of bounds in the field of play it went through the opposing team's endzone

5 minutes ago, kmoore1521 said:

I am very confused about this "the ball cannot be advanced" thing. The ball cannot be advanced on a fumble regardless of if it is in the end zone or not.

Pretend Higgins fumbled on the 5, then a teammate picked it up to score...the play would be dead at the spot of the fumble upon recovering possession.

5 minutes ago, kmoore1521 said:

Moving the line of scrimmage BACK thus penalizing the team that fumbles is crazy? isn't that the point of why you like the change of possession rule? to penalize the fumbling team? Its the same concept not sure why that's ridiculous? 

The penalty for fumbling, in the opponent's endzone, is losing possession of the ball. Seems like a fair trade to me.

2 minutes ago, Boudewijn said:

Right. So to me it makes sense if that's just an incomplete pass, and if a fumble out of bounds is just a fumble, then a fumble through the end zone should also be just a fumble.

It is just a fumble. But because you did that in my endzone/territory that's my ball now.

 

There's a lot of dumb rules in football, like getting the ball in the 40 when a kickoff goes out if bounds. They might not all make sense or be as "fair" as possible, but these are the rules of the game as they currently exist. Changing the rules of the game to reward incompetence is a step backwards.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lolcopter said:

Good point. The Browns were the last team to have possession, but the ball did not go out of bounds in the field of play it went through the opposing team's endzone

Pretend Higgins fumbled on the 5, then a teammate picked it up to score...the play would be dead at the spot of the fumble upon recovering possession.

The penalty for fumbling, in the opponent's endzone, is losing possession of the ball. Seems like a fair trade to me.

There's a lot of dumb rules in football, like getting the ball in the 40 when a kickoff goes out if bounds. They might not all make sense or be as "fair" as possible, but these are the rules of the game as they currently exist. Changing the rules of the game to reward incompetence is a step backwards.

See but in your Higgins example that's what I'm saying is the inconsistent part, they change the rules if it goes out of the endzone, when for all other fumbles its dead where it was originally fumbled, which in this case is usually be the 1-2 yard line. Which I don't like, I want it consistent, just my preference and leaves less room for nitpicking and fans complaining (we all hate that hah).

 

I agree there should be a penalty for it no doubt. I want it less severe though than a change of possession. So my middle ground for everyone is take it back to the 20-25 yard line (resembling a touchback). I do not think they should get the ball at the 1-2 yard line if they fumble out of the endzone because as you said, don't reach the ball out then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, daethfromabove1979 said:

Just curious, does the XFL have this same rule in place or did they tweak it?

XFL and College appear to be similar best I can tell, still looking

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, lolcopter said:

No way should they get a full set of downs. Maybe a 4th and goal from the 25 or something just for fun (no kicks allowed)

If it followed the rules of any other fumble they would get the ball where it was fumbled. No forward progress. And whatever the next down was. If it resulted in the 1st down it would be a 1st and goal at the 1 yard line.

The ball is fumbled in the field of play.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally like the rule a lot, gotta have that danger out there for mistakes, but I see where everyone is coming from with the discussion. It does seem like changing it would be highly advantageous for the offense, and as previously mentioned, we have a quite a lot of that already. At the end of the day, you can't prevent the Cleveland Browns from being the Cleveland Browns!

Edited by lolcopter
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Item 3. Out of Bounds.When a fumble goes out of bounds between the goal lines, the following shall
apply:
(a) If a fumble goes backward and out of bounds, the ball is next put in play at the inbounds spot by
the team that was last in possession;
(b) If a fumble goes forward and out of bounds, the ball is next put in play at the spot of the fumble
by the team that was last in possession;
OFFICIAL NFL PLAYING RULES 51(c) If a ball is fumbled in a team’s own end zone and goes forward into the field of play and out of
bounds, it will result in a safety, if that team provided the impetus that put the ball into the end
zone (See Rule 11, Section 5, Article 1 for exception for momentum). If the impetus was provided
by the opponent, the play will result in a touchback;
(d) Notwithstanding any of the above, when there has not been a change of possession during the
down, and the spot of the ball is not at or beyond the line to gain after fourth down, the ball is
awarded to Team B at the spot that the ball is declared dead.
Item 4. Out of Bounds in End Zone.When a fumble goes out of bounds in the end zone, the following
shall apply:
(a) If a ball is fumbled in the field of play, and goes forward into the opponent’s end zone and over
the end line or sideline, a touchback is awarded to the defensive team; or
(b) If a ball is fumbled in a team’s own end zone or in the field of play and goes out of bounds in the
end zone, it is a safety, if that team provided the impetus that sent the ball into the end zone (See
11-5-1 for exception for momentum). If the impetus was provided by the opponent, it is a
touchback.

https://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/11_Rule8_ForwardPass_BackPass_Fumble.pdf

 

 

just reading over other related articles, I would argue that the spot foul for defense pass interference is far more egregious than any of this fumbling stuff, but that's a thread for another day I suppose

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, devaster said:

If it followed the rules of any other fumble they would get the ball where it was fumbled. No forward progress. And whatever the next down was. If it resulted in the 1st down it would be a 1st and goal at the 1 yard line.

The ball is fumbled in the field of play.

 

Many of you are treating the endzone and out of bounds as if they are the same. They're not.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lolcopter said:

I personally like the rule a lot, gotta have that danger out there for mistakes, but I see where everyone is coming from with the discussion. It does seem like changing it would be highly advantageous for the offense, and as previously mentioned, we have a quite a lot of that already. At the end of the day, you can't prevent the Cleveland Browns from being the Cleveland Browns!

I like the excitement it can bring, just a massive swing in a split second. Probably the most costly play in football.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ThreadKiller said:

 

Many of you are treating the endzone and out of bounds as if they are the same. They're not.

I think that's the basis of the thread

One half see's the end zone as having a special rule with regards to fumbles and loves it

One half wants the end zone treated like any other fumble out of bounds

I am somewhere in between as shown in my posts hah 🤷‍♂️

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2021 at 12:45 PM, kmoore1521 said:

"I am very confused about this "the ball cannot be advanced" thing. The ball cannot be advanced on a fumble regardless of if it is in the end zone or not."

I understand the point that you make, that the rule is inconsistent. I did find that they haven't addressed it because it doesn't occur very often. Sometimes it's worth considering what may arise in changing a rule. This circumstance occurs primarily because the ball-carrier's momentum carries him toward the pylon & the boundary. Remove the risk of extending the ball out away from the body & we would likely see a lot more of it. What may come with that are a lot more replay challenges. If the obscure, crummy rule yields a smoother game flow, I don't care about the rule.      

Edited by markrc99
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2021 at 4:57 PM, kmoore1521 said:

I think that's the basis of the thread

One half see's the end zone as having a special rule with regards to fumbles and loves it

One half wants the end zone treated like any other fumble out of bounds

I am somewhere in between as shown in my posts hah 🤷‍♂️

I think it's a stretch to claim that everyone who is able to distinguish the difference between out of bounds and the endzone "loves it". I think they just understand the difference.

To me, the point that out of bound is different than the end zone can't be argued against.

Edited by ThreadKiller
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...