a bad rule

#202
#202
VOLorNuttin said:
Shut your face, punk....at the 5:00 mark of the video you can clearly see that the left hand still had hold of the ball until it crosses the goal line. Only then does it actually leave his hand.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVnq36uDPys&feature=share&list=PL6weYoLf7qRJuVChW7mecgaEoQS7nrVuZ[/youtube]
Click to expand...

LOL a punk? Such a big, tough guy. Dude he fumbled the ball it's pretty clear. He tried to one hand it and he fumbled. Move on.
 
#203
#203
KingtUT said:
This just shows how much attention you were paying. Pig was in the damn air when he dropped it, get a clue.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but it really doesn't matter how he fumbled anyways, facts are he did and everyone uses it as an excuse. You have to take care of the ball. All of you guys are so touchy when other VOL fans don't agree to your guys theories of rule changes. A rule is a rule, so hold onto the ball at the end zone.
 
#204
#204
keckjm said:
Sorry, but it really doesn't matter how he fumbled anyways, facts are he did and everyone uses it as an excuse. You have to take care of the ball. All of you guys are so touchy when other VOL fans don't agree to your guys theories of rule changes. A rule is a rule, so hold onto the ball at the end zone.
Click to expand...

I dont consider being against a rule being "touchy". I dont have a problem with people agreeing with the rule if they have a legitimate reason. Problem is, all you hear is , "its been a rule forever so its a good rule". or maybe you hear...."if it happened to the other team, the rule would be fine". I call BS. Nobody has given a legitimate reason why the rule was put in place. The reasoning behind my side is like everyone else has said, if you fumble out of bounds anywhere else (except for your own endzone), you retain possession. Pretty simple argument to make. This has nothing to do with us winning or losing the game. Anything could have happened after that play even if it was ruled in our favor.
 
Last edited:
#205
#205
Did y'all whine like this after Corey Anderson fumbled it against Bama in 05?

It's a loss. Get over it. You can't change a rule that is consistent across all levels of football because your runner couldn't hold on to the ball.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#206
#206
When the ball is live in the endzone, the only way the Offense can retain possession is if the ball is in their hands when the whistle blows. If it's in the defenses' hands: touchback. If it rolls out of bounds: touchback. If it's in the offenses hands: touchdown.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#207
#207
crusse10 said:
Did y'all whine like this after Corey Anderson fumbled it against Bama in 05?

It's a loss. Get over it. You can't change a rule that is consistent across all levels of football because your runner couldn't hold on to the ball.
Click to expand...

Well since you put it that way. :mf_surrender:
 
#208
#208
KingtUT said:
I dont consider being against a rule being "touchy". I dont have a problem with people agreeing with the rule if they have a legitimate reason. Problem is, all you hear is , "its been a rule forever so its a good rule". or maybe you hear...."if it happened to the other team, the rule would be fine". I call BS. Nobody has given a legitimate reason why the rule was put in place. The reasoning behind my side is like everyone else has said, if you fumble out of bounds anywhere else (except for your own endzone), you retain possession. Pretty simple argument to make. This has nothing to do with us winning or losing the game. Anything could have happened after that play even if it was ruled in our favor.
Click to expand...

Yes they have; you have continued to argue them as legitimate reasons. After a while people get tired of trying to discuss with someone who obviously isn't going accept anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#209
#209
crusse10 said:
Did y'all whine like this after Corey Anderson fumbled it against Bama in 05?

It's a loss. Get over it. You can't change a rule that is consistent across all levels of football because your runner couldn't hold on to the ball.
Click to expand...

Some claim they did, but there's no way to know. But obviously nothing was changed, and that was 8 years ago.

So to you guys that hate the rule, good luck with changing it.
 
#210
#210
Specs said:
Rule: a runner cannot advance a fumble

There. I took care of a back purposely fumbling forward to gain yardage.

Its a bad rule. If you fumble out of the end zone you should receive the ball exactly where it was lost
Click to expand...

I can understand a penalty for fumbling forward but not loss of possession. Giving the other team the ball seems over kill.
 
#211
#211
VolsSportsFan said:
Some claim they did, but there's no way to know. But obviously nothing was changed, and that was 8 years ago.

So to you guys that hate the rule, good luck with changing it.
Click to expand...

Do you like the rule? or do you just accept it as a rule?

By the way, im against the new kick off rules too. That doesnt mean the new rule doesnt have merit, im just against it. Again, i dont think it absolutely cost us the game.

Everyone doesnt have to agree with me but im pretty sure im not in the minority on this one. Either way, we lost and thats the bottom line, doesnt change the fact that i'll be attending the USCjr game. My first of the BJ era!!
 
#212
#212
KingtUT said:
Do you like the rule? or do you just accept it as a rule?

By the way, im against the new kick off rules too. That doesnt mean the new rule doesnt have merit, im just against it. Again, i dont think it absolutely cost us the game.

Everyone doesnt have to agree with me but im pretty sure im not in the minority on this one. Either way, we lost and thats the bottom line, doesnt change the fact that i'll be attending the USCjr game. My first of the BJ era!!
Click to expand...

I'm pretty much indifferent to the rule. If they changed it, I wouldn't exactly protest too much, but I'm also not really pushing for it. I think it is something that can reward the defense for a good play but it's usually so rare it only is highlighted in situations like this.

I guess I'm kind of opposite; it's not that I think it's a good or bad rule, but it's the rule and I haven't heard a convincing enough argument for me to think it's bad.
 
#213
#213
VolsSportsFan said:
I'm pretty much indifferent to the rule. If they changed it, I wouldn't exactly protest too much, but I'm also not really pushing for it. I think it is something that can reward the defense for a good play but it's usually so rare it only is highlighted in situations like this.

I guess I'm kind of opposite; it's not that I think it's a good or bad rule, but it's the rule and I haven't heard a convincing enough argument for me to think it's bad.
Click to expand...

See , I dont have a problem with that. I guess I think it should be ruled differently depending on which endzone the fumble occurs in. If my defense makes a play and causes you to fumble out of bounds while your in your own endzone or if they cause you to fumble backwards through your own endzone, I think the defense should be rewarded with a safety.

If the offense fumbles forward through the endzone im attempting to score in (regardless of how the fumble happens) I think the offense should retain possession from the spot of the fumble. Right or wrong, thats how I see it.

I see it as an overly harsh penalty for the offense as opposed to not rewarding the defense enough for causing the fumble.
 
Last edited:
#214
#214
KingtUT said:
See , I dont have a problem with that. I guess I think it should be ruled differently depending on which endzone the fumble occurs in. If my defense makes a play and causes you to fumble out of bounds while your in your own endzone or if they cause you to fumble backwards through your own endzone, I think the defense should be rewarded with a safety.

If the offense fumbles forward through the endzone im attempting to score in (regardless of how the fumble happens) I think the offense should retain possession from the spot of the fumble. Right or wrong, thats how I see it.

I see it as an overly harsh penalty for the offense as opposed to not rewarding the defense enough for causing the fumble.
Click to expand...

It's not overly harsh, it's the penalty for a live ball in the endzone.
 
#216
#216
crusse10 said:
It's not overly harsh, it's the penalty for a live ball in the endzone.
Click to expand...
Going out of bounds is not the same as having a live ball in the end zone. The only way an opponent to get possession of the ball from a fumble out of bounds, like this, is if it DOES NOT go out of bounds and the defense recovers. That's fair all day long. But to snatch a victory from one team over a bogus rule and effectively hand it to the other....especially after such great effort...is a travesty. The kid deserved a TD on that play or to have it spotted at the 1yd line. This rule needs to change and soon. Too easy to rob other teams and players, who are simply trying to extend to the pylon.

I always thought it was the most retarded rule in all of football. If a defender can snatch it before it goes out of bounds....sure. Touchback all day long. But apart from that, spot it where the player allegedly lost control.
 
#217
#217
Dumb rule for sure. If Pig fumbled on the 15 and it went out of bounds at the 14, it would be our ball at the 15. Georgia got rewarded for essentially doing nothing.

I wouldn't complain if the rule went our way, but it really makes zero sense.

And yes, this conversation is happening here, because it worked against us yesterday, but that doesn't void the argument. No one is asking Georgia to apologize and give us the win. It's just a dumb rule that has no logical basis. Unfortunately, I don't think it will ever change.
 
Last edited:
#218
#218
I can't believe the faux outrage at this rule. It has been in existence for ever (or at least as long as I can remember). This rule covers punts, kick offs, dumbass players dropping the ball before the goal line when running into the endzone, and yes, perceived fumbles by Vols. Get over it. It isn't going to be changed.
 
#219
#219
VOLorNuttin said:
Going out of bounds is not the same as having a live ball in the end zone. The only way an opponent to get possession of the ball from a fumble out of bounds, like this, is if it DOES NOT go out of bounds and the defense recovers. That's fair all day long. But to snatch a victory from one team over a bogus rule and effectively hand it to the other....especially after such great effort...is a travesty. The kid deserved a TD on that play or to have it spotted at the 1yd line. This rule needs to change and soon. Too easy to rob other teams and players, who are simply trying to extend to the pylon.

I always thought it was the most retarded rule in all of football. If a defender can snatch it before it goes out of bounds....sure. Touchback all day long. But apart from that, spot it where the player allegedly lost control.
Click to expand...

Why does a person deserve a touchdown when he doesn't even get into the endzone with the ball? Wanna get a touchdown and win? Secure the ball. High reward comes with high risk, and we lost the ballgame fair and square.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#220
#220
KingtUT said:
Again, nice job of backing up your opinion. :shakehead:

You win, i give up.
Click to expand...

What you don't understand is that I don't have to back up a fact. Ball security wins the game, not complaining because of a rule that was correctly called.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#222
#222
crusse10 said:
Why does a person deserve a touchdown when he doesn't even get into the endzone with the ball? Wanna get a touchdown and win? Secure the ball. High reward comes with high risk, and we lost the ballgame fair and square.
Click to expand...

not one person has said we didnt lose the game fair and square.
 
#224
#224
Right call was made. I wish balls fumbled to the sideline would go back to the spot of the fumble and only those lost in the back of the endzone be considered touchbacks.

I think that is a fair compromise.
 
#225
#225
JonWard said:
Right call was made. I wish balls fumbled to the sideline would go back to the spot of the fumble and only those lost in the back of the endzone be considered touchbacks.

I think that is a fair compromise.
Click to expand...

That would be better than what we have but still lacks consistency
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top