Two questions about The Pick

Like most of you, I've probably watched that sequence a couple of hundred times since Sunday. One thing isn't clear to me; I apologize if this has been addressed in another thread.

The play happens in a flash, but there is no doubt that the ball itself is in the field of play when he makes the interception. In addition, it looks tome like that, for a split second, each of his feet touch down in the field of play beyond the white end zone line after he has caught the ball. His momentum then takes him back into the end zone and, as we all know, he runs out to the two yard line. So here are my questions:

Question 1: Is my perception right? Did each one of his feet land in the field of play beyond the end zone line for a very brief period of time after he made The Pick?

Question 2: If both of his feet were in the field of play beyond the end zone line for that split second, what would have been ruled if he had gone to the ground in the end zone? Would it have been ruled a Touchback because his momentum had carried him there or would it have been ruled a Safety if (and presumably when) a Seahawks' player touched or landed on him?

There's no doubt in my mind that his instinct was the right instinct to get out of the end zone, BTW. I'm just wondering what the rules would say about this.

Thank you.

If he is in the EZ its a touchback. Why is the confusing to anyone?

The only way it would not be a TB in the EZ is if there was a penalty against NE on the play. Then it would have been a safety and perhaps he was just removing that as a possible option.

Bruins29 said:

If he is in the EZ its a touchback. Why is the confusing to anyone?

The only way it would not be a TB in the EZ is if there was a penalty against NE on the play. Then it would have been a safety and perhaps he was just removing that as a possible option.

Click to expand...

But, if he runs into the end zone from the field of play, why would it not be a safety unless the rule is that his momentum carried him there?

If his momentum carried him into the endzone it is a touchback. It would have been much better for him to lay down in the endzone rather than try and come out. Either way it worked out fine.

If he stepped out and then went back in it would be a safety.

moosekill said:

If his momentum carried him into the endzone it is a touchback. It would have been much better for him to lay down in the endzone rather than try and come out. Either way it worked out fine.

Click to expand...

Of course it did. I was just curious. I kind of thought that the right answer would be that because his momentum carried him there, it was a Touchback, but I wasn't sure. I also don't trust the officials at that point.

It's not clear to me how the rules work, exactly, in this scenario.

Here's what I do know: you can't be tackled into the end zone while out of the end zone and be called for a safety.

It's not entirely clear to me whether what Butler did after the pick qualifies as changing the "impetus" of the ball from Wilson's pass attempt to his attempts to advance the ball.

Yes, you can not go back into the EZ after you leave. And, yes, he should have taken a knee obviously but he either was just nervous which is likely or thinking about a possible penalty which is a lot less likely.

From what I understand it's a matter of forward progress. If he caught it in the field of play and got tackled back into the endzone, it would be placed where he caught it. The only way that becomes a safety is if he catches it in the field of play and then enters the endzone of his own will. If he immediately went to the ground and ended up in the endzone, untouched (fell backwards lets say), I think it's way to close and it would be called a touchback, even if the ball hit his hands just in the field of play. I could be wrong though, I've never seen that kind of play where it was caught just infront of the endzone and the player fell into the endzone and they called it a safety (or reversed the call to a safety).

Bruins29 said:

Yes, you can not go back into the EZ after you leave. And, yes, he should have taken a knee obviously but he either was just nervous which is likely or thinking about a possible penalty which is a lot less likely.

Click to expand...

I think his forward momentum took him out of the end zone. he collided with Lockette really hard, Lockette bounced back several yards, the collision was so hard.

scott99 said:

I think his forward momentum took him out of the end zone. he collided with Lockette really hard, Lockette bounced back several yards, the collision was so hard.

Click to expand...

Probably. His full energy was probably just focused on holding on to the ball. Everything else was secondary.

if a bird in japan flapped its wings in the summer equinox would a typhoon on mars cause an earthquake in Jupiter?

Why is this a discussion at this point? Butler made the right call regardless of if he caught it just inside the endzone, or not. you are better off not risking a safety because you were not looking at your feet when you caught the ball.

guys enjoy the moment, stop over analyzing plays like did so and so trip so and so, could he have gotten a touchback, if brady just threw it 1 quarter of a mil per hour faster the second interception never would have happened.

I'm certain that his first foot landed outside of the end zone, and I believe that to be true of the second too.

Clearly, the safety v. touchback issue is muddy enough that it was best not to put it in the hands of the officials to decide. Butler made the right move.

chasa said:

if a bird in japan flapped its wings in the summer equinox would a typhoon on mars cause an earthquake in Jupiter?

Why is this a discussion at this point? Butler made the right call regardless of if he caught it just inside the endzone, or not. you are better off not risking a safety because you were not looking at your feet when you caught the ball.

guys enjoy the moment, stop over analyzing plays like did so and so trip so and so, could he have gotten a touchback, if brady just threw it 1 quarter of a mil per hour faster the second interception never would have happened.

Click to expand...

The question, which is certainly legitimate, was asked. The correct answer, in my understanding of the rules is, it would have been much better for him to take a knee in the endzone and not try and come out. Where his feet originally were has no bearing, his momentum carried him in there, and it would have been a touchback, Pats get the ball at the 20, and the game is over. Am I upset that he tried to come out, no of course not, it just would have been better if he stayed in.

turkeyneck said:

Clearly, the safety v. touchback issue is muddy enough that it was best not to put it in the hands of the officials to decide. Butler made the right move.

Click to expand...

It is only muddy to the people who don't know the rules. I would assume the officials would have known the rules and would have ruled correctly. Plus, if on the ensuing play, Seattle hadn't been drawn off side, and the Patriots had taken a safety and been forced to kick off, we would all be wishing he had taken a knee in the endzone.

Placement of his feet is not important it's the spot of the ball that matters when his feet are down. His momentum did not carry him into the end zone his momentum was forward the contact with Lockette knocked him back . It would depend where he was ruled to have gained possession of the ball. I believe Butler made the right call to get out of the end zone just incase. A safety would have been pretty much the worst thing to happen in that situation. The Safety kick would be a tough choice do we kick it deep and not be able to cover it well risking a big return or a short kick to cover it allowing them to fair catch and take a free kick to win the game. Even if a safety would have won me a lot of money.

chasa said:

Why is this a discussion at this point?

Click to expand...

I'm guessing a lot of people wondered what the rules were and exactly where Butler was when he caught the ball -- we were talking about whether he *could* not *should* have taken the knee and what would have been the implications. There are some smart people on this forum, and I'm sure someone will dig out a rule book and explain exactly what would have happened if 21 took a knee.

moosekill said:

I would assume the officials would have known the rules and would have ruled correctly.

Click to expand...

Recent NFL history doesn't back that up.

moosekill said:

If he stepped out and then went back in it would be a safety.

Click to expand...

Only if he was tackled.

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/safety2


Examples of Non-Safety:

(a) Player intercepts a pass with both feet inbounds in the field of play and his momentum carries him into his own end zone. Ball is put in play at spot of interception.

(b) Player intercepts a pass in his own end zone and is downed in the end zone, even after recovering in the end zone. Impetus came from passing team, not from defense. (Touchback)



If Butler had taken a knee in, or was immediately tackled in the end zone, the ball would have been placed at the spot of the interception.