Mike Pereira: Time to change the tuck rule

[NovaScotiaPatsFan]

For the longest time I thought it was a stupid rule that was applied correctly in the Raiders game, but more and more I see the value of the rule. It makes it so that the ref doesn't have to make a judgement call as to whether the QB was trying to pass or not. Anything that takes judgement out of a review and makes it a black and white matter I think is a good thing.

 

[signbabybrady]

There is a huge flaw to the tuck rule that isn't often mentioned.

Have you ever seen a QB begin to move his arm forward but the ball slips out of his hand and goes backward as he's being hit?

That's often ruled a fumble.

According to the tuck rule, it shouldn't be.

I'd be OK with them eliminating the rule depending on the trajectory of the ball. If the ball is flung forward, then it's a pass, but if it drops to the ground or otherwise goes waggy or something then it's a fumble. Refs would again have to use their judgment.

It actually sounds like you are reffering to an instance that would be known as the open palm.

Which basically states a ball is fumble even if the QB pushes it forward after it popped out (these occur right at the start of the throwing motion and if he has "open palm" split second before forward pass motion starts its fumble if he has begun forward throwing motion its a pass and then as throwing motion starts to become tucking motion or at least seem to cease being throwing motion you get into Tuck).

 

[PatsChamp88]

Other rules need work too...

 

[signbabybrady]

Other rules need work too...

Yeah I know they need to evaluate the hitting rule. They should think about two hand touch or Flags someone is going to get hurt.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Was this face guarding incident form the AFCCG? I'm not sure but I thought there was a bogus call on Ellis Hobbs (or Asante?) because he was turned away from the ball.

I'm certain that the Hobbs call against the Colts was the reference.

Bogus call. Cost us the game.

 

[upstater1]

It actually sounds like you are reffering to an instance that would be known as the open palm.

Which basically states a ball is fumble even if the QB pushes it forward after it popped out (these occur right at the start of the throwing motion and if he has "open palm" split second before forward pass motion starts its fumble if he has begun forward throwing motion its a pass and then as throwing motion starts to become tucking motion or at least seem to cease being throwing motion you get into Tuck).

Thank you, didn't know that, never heard of the open palm. Sounds a little like the black hand!

 

[PatsChamp88]

Yeah I know they need to evaluate the hitting rule. They should think about two hand touch or Flags someone is going to get hurt.

I thought Goodell was changing the rule next season that prevents players from playing?

 

[BradyBranch39]

The end result is a rule that states that once the throwing motion has started, it is not complete until ... It's obvious the rule hugely favors the offense, but every team has to play by this rule.

THis is a great point, because technically, any time a guy's arm is moving forward he could unload a pass. Maybe a QB is intentionally trying to throw a pass low and short, so he alters his motion. He should not be penalized for that. Neither should a theoretically awful-mechanic-ed QB who just happens to have a shi¬¬y motion.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I don't like the tuck rule. It's here we have it fine ... but I don't like it.

I think if a QB's arm is moving forward it's a pass, if the arm doesn't reach the release point it's a fumble. I mean we never had the tuck rule when we played pick up games ... no need for it. The QB has the intent of throwing it ... but he changes his mind ... too bad.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I got no problem if they change the tuck rule either - all that matters is that they have a rule that they consistently apply. The league changes rules all the time.

I do have a problem with crybaby Raiders fans who act like there's been some crime committed.

Teams that fall victim to blown calls during a big game? They got a legitimate gripe. That's not what happened here. It was an established rule, properly applied.

Raiders fans might not like the rule, but they can't deny it was a rule or that it was properly applied. That's the part our Raiders fans can't quite seem to comprehend.

It's pretty pathetic really.

 

[Wolfpack]

Personally I would be fine with changing the tuck rule. Of course then Raiders fans would spin it as some sort of confirmation of their stance that it was somehow the wrong call.

I don't care whether they keep it or dump it but, having said that, they aren't going to dump it. They don't want the referees to have to try and judge a QB's intent when determining whether or not it is a forward pass. They want a set definition of when a pass begins, when it is no longer a forward pass, and they want that definition to have absolutely nothing to do with refs attempting to discern what a QB was intending to do.

 

[Wolfpack]

Pereira needs to **** off. Especially with this little quote,

“I’m sure it’s no consolation to the many Raiders fans around the country.”

So says the same man whose officials SCREWED us in Denver. And the same man who continually defended bogus calls against the Pats.

I think Raiders fans should shut up, especially since they have their own history of benefitting from strange rules - oh but unlike the tuck rule, the rulebook was changed after this infamous play:

 

[stcjones]

The problem with changing the rule is where is the line crossed from a passing motion to a tucking motion.

If you use the Brady play vs the raiders as an example my opinion is that it seemed pretty clear Brady was not throwing the ball but he was in a throwing motion and never even really began much of a tuck so where does one end and the other start.

What you are trying to do here is INTERPRET what the QB's INTENTION was.....Only the QB had some idea what he is trying to do with the football. The other day when the rule got invoked again was Matt Cassell getting hit while his arm was GOING FORWARD.....really doesn't matter what happens from that point as long as the ball HITS THE GROUND ...and is not caught by a defender. Same thing with Brady (ad nauseum).....his arm was clearly GOING FORWARD with Kevin faulk in front of him...again doesn't matter what he was intending to do....arm going forward ..ball hit the ground....incomplete pass or tuck rule whatever. Now if QB hit while arm still back or in "statue of liberty" position....then it is a fumble....I think they still need the rule...arm going forward or not...determines an important outcome...

 

[SpiderFox53]

There is a huge flaw to the tuck rule that isn't often mentioned.

Have you ever seen a QB begin to move his arm forward but the ball slips out of his hand and goes backward as he's being hit?

That's often ruled a fumble.

According to the tuck rule, it shouldn't be. I'd be OK with them eliminating the rule depending on the trajectory of the ball. If the ball is flung forward, then it's a pass, but if it drops to the ground or otherwise goes waggy or something then it's a fumble. Refs would again have to use their judgment.

The Tuck rule begins at the start of forward motion, if the ball slips out before that it would be a fumble whether it went forward or backwards. Wouldn't it?

 

[stcjones]

Pereira needs to **** off. Especially with this little quote,

“I’m sure it’s no consolation to the many Raiders fans around the country.”

So says the same man whose officials SCREWED us in Denver. And the same man who continually defended bogus calls against the Pats.

This douche bag must be a closet sore a##ed raider fan.....that's what spurned this bullsh(t article....

 

[upstater1]

The Tuck rule begins at the start of forward motion, if the ball slips out before that it would be a fumble whether it went forward or backwards. Wouldn't it?

Yes, it would. But I was addressing what happens AFTER the arm starts moving forward. You could make judgments based on the trajectory of the ball.

 

[upstater1]

I don't like the tuck rule. It's here we have it fine ... but I don't like it.

I think if a QB's arm is moving forward it's a pass, if the arm doesn't reach the release point it's a fumble. I mean we never had the tuck rule when we played pick up games ... no need for it. The QB has the intent of throwing it ... but he changes his mind ... too bad.

What if his arm is hit before he releases it and the ball goes 8 yards downfield?

Fumble?

We see this all the time. It's called an incomplete pass.

So, if that rule is changed, then any time a QB goes back to throw and the referee thinks a player grazed his arm, a forward pass becomes a fumble.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

The Tuck rule is imperfect but it is far better than reverting to ref's judgement of intent and trajectory.