a bad rule

#126
#126
KingtUT said:
I think your right. Regardless of the fact that its been a rule for decades, you honestly agree with it.? I just think it makes perfect sense that if the ball is fumbled and not recovered before it goes out of bounds, the offense should retain possession where the ball was fumbled from.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree with it and the fact that people have been complaining about it whenever it affects them yet every level of football has refused to change it tells me it is a fundamental rule of football.

You must take the ball across the goal line. It is nowhere near as harsh as a safety where the team that scores also gets the ball. Why not complain about that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#128
#128
volinbham said:
Are you sure that if Pig fumbled into the endzone and another Vol recovered it wouldn't be a TD. I'm pretty sure (not 100%) that it would be.
Click to expand...

That very well may be, I'm not sure on the college rule, though I think you should not be able to advance a fumble due to the fumbling forward on purpose deal
 
#129
#129
volinbham said:
Yes I agree with it and the fact that people have been complaining about it whenever it affects them yet every level of football has refused to change it tells me it is a fundamental rule of football.

You must take the ball across the goal line. It is nowhere near as harsh as a safety where the team that scores also gets the ball. Why not complain about that?
Click to expand...

Because safeties are cool. Plus we haven't lost because of one yet that I know of.

But as soon as we lose a game from one, you know it will suddenly be stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#130
#130
volinbham said:
Yes I agree with it and the fact that people have been complaining about it whenever it affects them yet every level of football has refused to change it tells me it is a fundamental rule of football.

You must take the ball across the goal line. It is nowhere near as harsh as a safety where the team that scores also gets the ball. Why not complain about that?
Click to expand...

I can't figure out how you can even remotely compare the the two scenarios. A safety is a safety, a fumble is not always just a fumble depending on where it happens. I happen to think it should be. Cut and dry, just like a safety.
 
#131
#131
Specs said:
That very well may be, I'm not sure on the college rule, though I think you should not be able to advance a fumble due to the fumbling forward on purpose deal
Click to expand...

so that's dumb too?

sure was sweet in the Sugarbowl against Miami when Tim McGee (I believe) covered a fumble from one of our running backs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#133
#133
KingtUT said:
I can't figure out how you can even remotely compare the the two scenarios. A safety is a safety, a fumble is not always just a fumble depending on where it happens. I happen to think it should be. Cut and dry, just like a safety.
Click to expand...

Oh a safety is a safety - that clears it up.



why is a penalty in the endzone a safety but not one on the one or in the field of play?

why is a bad snap a safety if it goes out of the endzone but not one in the field of play?
 
#134
#134
VolsSportsFan said:
I love the fact that since this just happened to us, now suddenly everyone thinks it's a stupid rule.

Before that play hardly anyone gave it any thought.
Click to expand...
Only because it rarely occurs. I have ALWAYS thought it was a horrendous ruling. If a defender falls on the ball in the endzone, that should be the ONLY way the ball should go back to the defense.

It should be ruled down at the point the ball came loose. I saw that a week or two ago in an NFL game, I think, and was thinking how retarded that rule is.
 
#135
#135
Facts are this, when you play the game you must fully understand the rules of the game. PIG made a play, but it's best to lunge forward with two hands. I love the effort and can't fault PIG, as he had a great game, but that's one for the learning curve for a young team. Had PIG just went two handed we would have had the ball on the one yard line at the most. Like I said you can't fault him for the effort, but this is a good teaching tool for this team to show that you must take care of the ball near the goal line. This is just one of those plays that you sit back and say d*** we were that close. Reminded me of the Titans catch in the Super Bowl, just so close.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#136
#136
Which came first , the chicken or the egg?

Who's on first?

Why did the chicken cross the road?

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around, does it make a noise?
 
#137
#137
VolsSportsFan said:
I love the fact that since this just happened to us, now suddenly everyone thinks it's a stupid rule.

Before that play hardly anyone gave it any thought.
Click to expand...

I thought it was a dumb rule when it happened to Foster. Here we are years later and its still a stupid ****ing rule.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#141
#141
orangeslice13 said:
Nope. It's stupid any way you look at it.
Click to expand...

It's really not man. All of us are disappointed; however, in that situation PIG was never down so it was a fumble that went out of bounds. You can't rule him down at the one because he never was down before the ball came out. If you fumble the ball into your end zone it's a touch back. There's a reason why they say carry the ball with extreme care near the goal line.
 
#142
#142
keckjm said:
It's really not man. All of us are disappointed; however, in that situation PIG was never down so it was a fumble that went out of bounds. You can't rule him down at the one because he never was down before the ball came out. If you fumble the ball into your end zone it's a touch back. There's a reason why they say carry the ball with extreme care near the goal line.
Click to expand...

I get the rule.
It's stupid.
If the play happens at the 40 streaching for a first down a ball is fumbled out of bounds, it returns to the point of the fumble. The end zone should only be relavent if the fumble is recoverd.
To recap
It's a stupid rule
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#143
#143
orangeslice13 said:
I get the rule.
It's stupid.
If the play happens at the 40 streaching for a first down a ball is fumbled out of bounds, it returns to the point of the fumble. The end zone should only be relavent if the fumble is recoverd.
To recap
It's a stupid rule
Click to expand...

why the offensive penalty and fumble out of endzone rules for safeties? are those dumb too?
 
#144
#144
orangeslice13 said:
I get the rule.
It's stupid.
If the play happens at the 40 streaching for a first down a ball is fumbled out of bounds, it returns to the point of the fumble. The end zone should only be relavent if the fumble is recoverd.
To recap
It's a stupid rule
Click to expand...

So let's say a DB makes a pick and runs it all the way and fumbles at the goal line. Should we say it's ok bring the offense out or do we say you fumbled its a touch back. Don't change something that isn't broken just because of some bad luck. If you hold onto the ball then the rule is irrevelant anyways. To recap, hold onto the ball. PIG made an effort, but to lunge out like that isn't smart. Most guys who lunge the football like PIG did are usually getting tackled and being pushed backwards away from the end zone. The force of the ground caused PIG to fumble, and he just didn't have good ball security as most players who dive for the end zone do it with two hands.
 
#145
#145
volinbham said:
thanks but be prepared to be told this doesn't "enhance the game"
Click to expand...

Enhance the game
enzyte-tshirt-swelling1.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#148
#148
keckjm said:
So let's say a DB makes a pick and runs it all the way and fumbles at the goal line. Should we say it's ok bring the offense out or do we say you fumbled its a touch back. Don't change something that isn't broken just because of some bad luck. If you hold onto the ball then the rule is irrevelant anyways. To recap, hold onto the ball. PIG made an effort, but to lunge out like that isn't smart. Most guys who lunge the football like PIG did are usually getting tackled and being pushed backwards away from the end zone. The force of the ground caused PIG to fumble, and he just didn't have good ball security as most players who dive for the end zone do it with two hands.
Click to expand...
You don't know what you are talking about. Pig was airborne with both hands on the ball and at the end the ball drifted out of the one hand but his left hand was still holding it until it crossed the goal line. The call should have stood as called on the field as there was not enough evidence that his left hand was not holding onto the ball when it hit the pylon.

It is still a stupid rule if something like that results in a ball going out of bounds, in the field of play or endzone.
If a defender covers it, it's theirs...both in the field of play and in the endzone. Likewise a fumble out of bounds should remain in the possession of the offense, whether it be in the end zone or field of play.
 
#149
#149
VOLorNuttin said:
You don't know what you are talking about. Pig was airborne with both hands on the ball and at the end the ball drifted out of the one hand but his left hand was still holding it until it crossed the goal line. The call should have stood as called on the field as there was not enough evidence that his left hand was not holding onto the ball when it hit the pylon.

It is still a stupid rule if something like that results in a ball going out of bounds, in the field of play or endzone.
If a defender covers it, it's theirs...both in the field of play and in the endzone. Likewise a fumble out of bounds should remain in the possession of the offense, whether it be in the end zone or field of play.
Click to expand...

I seriously do not know what replay you people are looking at.
 
#150
#150
VOLorNuttin said:
You don't know what you are talking about. Pig was airborne with both hands on the ball and at the end the ball drifted out of the one hand but his left hand was still holding it until it crossed the goal line. The call should have stood as called on the field as there was not enough evidence that his left hand was not holding onto the ball when it hit the pylon.

It is still a stupid rule if something like that results in a ball going out of bounds, in the field of play or endzone.
If a defender covers it, it's theirs...both in the field of play and in the endzone. Likewise a fumble out of bounds should remain in the possession of the offense, whether it be in the end zone or field of play.
Click to expand...

You appear to be confusing the rule and the ruling of the play. Pig was ruled to have fumbled and the rule thusly was applied.

Did he fumble? I wish not and there is a smidgen of doubt but in my heart when I saw the replay I knew he fumbled and I knew what that meant; as much as it sucked for us.

No one who is complaining about the rule can explain why safety rules operate the way they do and why the same basic rules that apply to fumbles in the endzone for a safety should not apply in the other endzone.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top