Dion Lewis Fumble/NOT a fumble

[XLIX]

Video is even more clear. He was hit by the second Jaguar while on the ground. This was not a fumble

Answer my question:

Do you agree he lost possession of the ball in my picture? Or do you think the player in my picture is a man in possession of a football?

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

That’s only relevant when you fumble out of bounds in the end zone.

no, the end zone aspect was another, separate aspect of the ASJ play, as Corrente also explained.

If a fumbling runner doesn't survive the ground, the ball is not possessed, and so it is a free ball. Anyone who possesses it in-bounds has the ball. If nobody possesses it and it goes out of the endzone, it is a touchback. If a defender possesses it in the end zone, it is a touchback. If the fumbler possesses it in the end zone, it is a touchdown. If not in the end zone and goes OOB, it goes to the team last in possession. If recovered in-bounds not in the end zone, it goes to the recoverer.

 

[resdubwhite]

fumble
but still won (yippee)

 

[brdmaverick]

Let me phrase it another way. Let's say he lost possesion (most believe he did) between the time the ball was initially contacted by the defender and the time he had it pinned against his leg.

Instead of him having it pinned against his leg, instead imagine he has TWO arms firmly around it. If he hit the ground and it popped out on contact it would STILL be a fumble, even if his knee was down (with defender contact) while he had the ball firmly with two hands.

 

[Dr Pain]

Video is even more clear. He was hit by the second Jaguar while on the ground. This was not a fumble

#50 knocks it out while Lewis is on the ground

 

[italian pat patriot]

i was so happy for him after the awesome final run of the game...he earned it...

 

[Dr Pain]

Answer my question:

Do you agree he lost possession of the ball in my picture? Or do you think the player in my picture is a man in possession of a football?

Moving not out. Not a fumble. He regained against his leg. Got knocked out by 50 on the ground

 

[luuked]

But if you have not re-established possession of the football after first losing control of it, a knee going down is totally irrelevant. You have to establish possession by surviving the ground. Corrente is perfectly clear on that.

I understand your point but it feels more like a technicality to me. What it boils down to is that you need clear possession to be down by contact and once you lose control you need to restablish it before you can be down by contact.

 

[brdmaverick]

Now my point of contention is whether or not he EVER lost possession. If he never lost possession then 'suriving the ground' doesn't come into play and the contact would make him down by contact.

 

[brdmaverick]

Moving not out. Not a fumble. He regained against his leg. Got knocked out by 50 on the ground

See, you are saying contradicting things.

If you say he REGAINED the ball. That means you thought it was once out (and therefore losing it on the ground is VERY relevant). THerefore he needs to survive the ground with the ball in order for his 'press against the leg' to count as possession.

Edit: Unless you are saying he did surivive the ground but the player knocked it away after he was down.

I'll have to take a look at the video but your statement would work in that scenario.

 

[brdmaverick]

I understand your point but it feels more like a technicality to me. What it boils down to is that you need clear possession to be down by contact and once you lose control you need to restablish it before you can be down by contact.

ASJ would agree wiht you but it doesn't make it right. After all, ASJ appeared to have the ball controlled and a knee down in the endzone BEFORE he eventually lost his control after hitting the ground.

 

[XLIX]

Moving not out. Not a fumble. He regained against his leg. Got knocked out by 50 on the ground

With all due respect, this is where you show you don't understand the rule. It doesn't have to come out to be a fumble.

If the ball is "moving," then that by definition is a fumble. A fumble is defined as "any act, other than passing, handing, or legally kicking the ball, which results in a loss of player possession."

So if you agree it was "moving" then you agree it was fumbled. It doesn't have to go bouncing on the ground in order to be considered a fumble.

Now that we agree it was a fumble, we move on to discussing if he clearly regained possession. In this case, the answer is he clearly did not. Having the ball loosely pinned against your hip for 0.2 seconds - and then subsequently not even surviving the ground - does not constitute regaining possession.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

This whole thread is a lesson in why "the ruling on the field" is so damn important.

 

[A Defiant Goose]

Moving not out. Not a fumble. He regained against his leg. Got knocked out by 50 on the ground

It moved and came out.

This must be what it feels like arguing with a flat earther

 

[luuked]

ASJ would agree wiht you but it doesn't make it right. After all, ASJ appeared to have the ball controlled and a knee down in the endzone BEFORE he eventually lost his control on the way down.

Yes but if this entire sequence happens on the field and not at the sideline of the end zone ASJ would have still come up with the ball and would be down by contact eventually.

The only reason the entire situation became so convoluted is because a fumble out of the end zone is a touchback. In open field the theoretical fumble would not matter because after regrasping the ball a second time he then had firm control of it.

 

[PatsFan2]

And Peter King agrees,

I stopped reading right there...Peter "Bend with the wind" King? Ask King who he has in the SB?? Depending on who you talk to he has both the Patriots and the Eagles winning.

 

[luuked]

This whole thread is a lesson in why "the ruling on the field" is so damn important.

Also shows that some people don’t understand what a fumble is. There is no need for a ball to come out or hit the ground.

 

[mb6592]

Please keep in mind that bobbling/juggling the ball is considered a fumble)

Is this true? How come I've witnessed countless running backs juggle, momentarilty lose control while running, but never actually fumble it and it doesn't show up on the stat sheet as an fumble and a recovery?

btw, I thought (by eye test) it was a fumble.

 

[JJC]

You don't get to call a wrong fact an opinion man!

Did you miss the years of denial of the Ideal Gas Law?

 

[brdmaverick]

In open field the theoretical fumble would not matter because after regrasping the ball a second time he then had firm control of it.

Agreed. Just emphasizing that if Lewis lost control after hitting the ground but regained/regrasped after that THEN and only then would he have been considered to have recovered the ball, not when his knee was down/ball pinned on his way to the ground.