Tuck Rule changing

[Uncle Rico]

Albert Breer ‏@AlbertBreer
CC rule change ... Changes to the Tuck Rule. If in the passing motion attempts to bring ball back, loses that ball, it's a fumble.

Haters will have fun with this. Yay.

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

Albert Breer ‏@AlbertBreer
CC rule change ... Changes to the Tuck Rule. If in the passing motion attempts to bring ball back, loses that ball, it's a fumble.

Haters will have fun with this. Yay.

Now they can refer to it as the Brady rule whenever a QB gets roughed or fumbles! Fact be damned!

 

[everlong]

Walt Colman hits the dislike button.

I need to go poke the Raiders fans I know with this tonight to get them going. It never gets old.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Good. I don't like the rule. But, under the rules at the time, it was an easy call.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Albert Breer ‏@AlbertBreer
CC rule change ... Changes to the Tuck Rule. If in the passing motion attempts to bring ball back, loses that ball, it's a fumble.

Haters will have fun with this. Yay.

What exactly does that mean? How is that any different from the current rule?

Right now if the QB brings the ball back to throw and loses it before his hand starts to move forward, it's a fumble. Once the hand starts moving forward it's an incomplete pass. How is the above any different?

Or is what Breer is trying to say is that if you bring the ball back, start moving the arm forward, do not tuck, and then bring the ball back again to "reload" and lose it on the way back it is a fumble? (I believe right now that you can "reload" all you want and it is never a fumble unless the ball is tucked back to the body before the reload).

 

[upstater1]

Albert Breer ‏@AlbertBreer
CC rule change ... Changes to the Tuck Rule. If in the passing motion attempts to bring ball back, loses that ball, it's a fumble.

Haters will have fun with this. Yay.

So what's the change to the rule?

I thought that was the rule?

As soon as your forward motion ended, you can fumble.

 

[upstater1]

What exactly does that mean? How is that any different from the current rule?

Right now if the QB brings the ball back to throw and loses it before his hand starts to move forward, it's a fumble. Once the hand starts moving forward it's an incomplete pass. How is the above any different?

Or is what Breer is trying to say is that if you bring the ball back, start moving the arm forward, do not tuck, and then bring the ball back again to "reload" and lose it on the way back it is a fumble? (I believe right now that you can "reload" all you want and it is never a fumble unless the ball is tucked back to the body before the reload).

As soon as you start to re**** your arm you can fumble right now.

That's why I don't understand what the rule change is about.

 

[Fixit]

Can we get a retroactive roughing call on Woodson?

 

[Shockt327]

What exactly does that mean? How is that any different from the current rule?

Right now if the QB brings the ball back to throw and loses it before his hand starts to move forward, it's a fumble. Once the hand starts moving forward it's an incomplete pass. How is the above any different?

Or is what Breer is trying to say is that if you bring the ball back, start moving the arm forward, do not tuck, and then bring the ball back again to "reload" and lose it on the way back it is a fumble? (I believe right now that you can "reload" all you want and it is never a fumble unless the ball is tucked back to the body before the reload).

No, no, no. The moment the forward arm movement stops...it's a fumble.

It was always that way.

 

[upstater1]

No, no, no. The moment the forward arm movement stops...it's a fumble.

It was always that way.

I almost agree with this, but I think "stop" might be a little off. If it stops (for say a split second) it's still not a fumble. Only when i starts to move back up or get tucked can it be a fumble.

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

What exactly does that mean? How is that any different from the current rule?

Right now if the QB brings the ball back to throw and loses it before his hand starts to move forward, it's a fumble. Once the hand starts moving forward it's an incomplete pass. How is the above any different?

Or is what Breer is trying to say is that if you bring the ball back, start moving the arm forward, do not tuck, and then bring the ball back again to "reload" and lose it on the way back it is a fumble? (I believe right now that you can "reload" all you want and it is never a fumble unless the ball is tucked back to the body before the reload).

NFL proposes to change 'Tuck Rule' - NFL.com

It's if you lose it bringing it back into your body. Pretty much the tuck rule would then just differentiate between the passing motion and tucking motion making the later a fumble.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

So Rosenthal's article says

The change will make it so a player loses possession when he tries to bring the ball back to his body. (Yes, then Tom Brady's play should have been ruled a fumble in that case.) If the passer loses control while the ball is going forward, it's still incomplete. If he loses the ball while tucking, it's a fumble.

I think I have it now.

Under the current rule, a pass attempt begins when the hand starts moving forward with the ball but doesn't end until the hand basically stops moving (or if the second hand is put on the ball), even if the hand goes from moving forward to moving down. And since losing the ball during a passing attempt is an incomplete pass, any loss of possession during that entire time is an incomplete pass.

But this rule (from what little we know of it) would define an pass attempt to send when the hand stops actually moving forward, even if it keeps moving? Is that the idea?

The thing that is confusing me a bit is that I recall Tuck Rule haters (both Pats fans and non-fans) talking about how the tuck rule would let a QB keep reloading/pumping over and over again without any risk of losing the ball once the hand made the initial move forward and as long as the second hand never went to the ball.

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

So Rosenthal's article says



I think I have it now.

Under the current rule, a pass attempt begins when the hand starts moving forward with the ball but doesn't end until the hand basically stops moving (or if the second hand is put on the ball), even if the hand goes from moving forward to moving down. And since losing the ball during a passing attempt is an incomplete pass, any loss of possession during that entire time is an incomplete pass.

But this rule (from what little we know of it) would define an pass attempt to send when the hand stops actually moving forward, even if it keeps moving? Is that the idea?

The thing that is confusing me a bit is that I recall Tuck Rule haters (both Pats fans and non-fans) talking about how the tuck rule would let a QB keep reloading/pumping over and over again without any risk of losing the ball once the hand made the initial move forward and as long as the second hand never went to the ball.

That's my understanding.

I think haters were misrepresenting things. Under the rule it'd be ruled a tuck if the QB was bringing the ball down even if it was clear he wasn't tucking. You gain an advantage if you didn't even try to secure the ball since it wouldn't be a fumble until your arm stopped or started moving backwards.

 

[Wolfpack]

This is a rule where it is literally impossible to satisfy everyone. No matter what the rule is, no matter how it is written, and no matter how it is enforced, sooner or later there is going to be a close-call which is going to upset a great many people, ESPN will replay it dozens of times from all angles, everyone will argue about what the call should have been, etc, etc.

 

[Deus Irae]

So Rosenthal's article says



I think I have it now.

Under the current rule, a pass attempt begins when the hand starts moving forward with the ball but doesn't end until the hand basically stops moving (or if the second hand is put on the ball), even if the hand goes from moving forward to moving down. And since losing the ball during a passing attempt is an incomplete pass, any loss of possession during that entire time is an incomplete pass.

But this rule (from what little we know of it) would define an pass attempt to send when the hand stops actually moving forward, even if it keeps moving? Is that the idea?

The thing that is confusing me a bit is that I recall Tuck Rule haters (both Pats fans and non-fans) talking about how the tuck rule would let a QB keep reloading/pumping over and over again without any risk of losing the ball once the hand made the initial move forward and as long as the second hand never went to the ball.

The old rule was designed to eliminate guesswork as to when the QB was no longer looking to throw and was looking to put the ball away on the part of the officials. The new rule would require a judgement call from the officials.


It's basically takes a bad rule and makes it worse.

 

[Shockt327]

I almost agree with this, but I think "stop" might be a little off. If it stops (for say a split second) it's still not a fumble. Only when i starts to move back up or get tucked can it be a fumble.

NFL Rule 3, Section 22, Article 2, Note 2. When [an offensive] player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.[1]

 

[CelticPatriot]

What's a Tuck Rule?

 

[Shockt327]

The Tuck rule is a bit of a misnomer; it's really more like "forward-arm movement rule." Why? Cause the QB's arm has to be moving forward for the rule to be in effect. So Brady's arm was moving forward as he was attempting to "tuck" the ball away. Hence, it's a fumble. The moment the arm *stops* moving - and the "tuck" is completed? It's a fumble.

The whole reason the rule existed was so a ref didn't have to make a subjective decision as to whether or not the QBs arm was moving forward in an attempt to thrown or tuck. But the arm still has to be moving. Brady's was. Incomplete.

So, nothing has changed....unless they are now supporting subjective calls.

BTW - Lol @ people who think refs were paid.

 

[Shockt327]

BTW - Before the Tuck rule, the refs had to determine the intent of the QB; was he trying to throw or not? The refs were responsible for evaluating the QBs internal thought process. Because of the Tuck rule, all they have to do was determine if the arm is going forward. It doesn't lead to perfect calls all the time - but it's much better than the alternative.

 

[Deus Irae]

BTW - Before the Tuck rule, the refs had to determine the intent of the QB; was he trying to throw or not? The refs were responsible for evaluating the QBs internal thought process. Because of the Tuck rule, all they have to do was determine if the arm is going forward. It doesn't lead to perfect calls all the time - but it's much better than the alternative.

They're going back to the subjective rule.