The ASJ Fumble

[A Defiant Goose]

Not possession

 

[yukon cornelius]

And had a huge miss that led to an easy Jets TD.

he undercut going for the pick and didn't get it.......that's gonna happen

 

[archstanton543]

he undercut going for the pick and didn't get it.......that's gonna happen

Not if he was playing his man like he was supposed to. If the Jets would have won you would have seen the shot of him laying on the ground while his man was showboating to the endzone on the back of the New York papers.

 

[yukon cornelius]

Not if he was playing his man like he was supposed to. If the Jet would have won you would have seen the shot of him laying on the ground while his man was showboating to the endzone on the back of the New York papers.

he undercut the route on his pick, too.....

 

[archstanton543]

he undercut the route on his pick, too.....

Of course he did. He's trying get his first big contract next year.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

No we don't. The Tuck Rule was a crappy rule. This isn't. Fumbling through the endzone should result in what then? A safety? The ball on the 1 with the fumbling team retaining possession? Or the other team getting possession?

If the offense fumble the ball and it goes OOB an inch before the plane the offense keeps the ball on the 1-inch line. But if it goes OOB an inch after the plane the defense gets the ball. Makes no sense to me. Have it be essentially the same result if it went OOB an inch before the plane. Since there's already the precedent of bad things happening in the EZ resulting in the ball being marked at the 1, that's what I'd do here. An offensive fumble through the EZ makes it the offense's ball on the 1.

 

[yukon cornelius]

Of course he did. He's trying get his first big contract next year.

he undercut the route vs seattle in the SB, too



now granted, on the TD today he mistimed it/misplayed the ball badly......but corners that create TO's take chances.....sometimes they miss

Butler had a solid day today overall

 

[A Defiant Goose]

If the offense fumble the ball and it goes OOB an inch before the plane the offense keeps the ball on the 1-inch line. But if it goes OOB an inch after the plane the defense gets the ball. Makes no sense to me. Have it be essentially the same result if it went OOB an inch before the plane. Since there's already the precedent of bad things happening in the EZ resulting in the ball being marked at the 1, that's what I'd do here. An offensive fumble through the EZ makes it the offense's ball on the 1.

The offense already gets a break by virtue of not getting a safety for that **** as it is. Leave the rule as it is imo

 

[yukon cornelius]

If the offense fumble the ball and it goes OOB an inch before the plane the offense keeps the ball on the 1-inch line. But if it goes OOB an inch after the plane the defense gets the ball. Makes no sense to me. Have it be essentially the same result if it went OOB an inch before the plane. Since there's already the precedent of bad things happening in the EZ resulting in the ball being marked at the 1, that's what I'd do here. An offensive fumble through the EZ makes it the offense's ball on the 1.

the competition committee has disagreed with you multiple times, though

so now you're saying the call was correct, and you don't like the rule? the raider fanbase says hello

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Eight pages!
Let's not overanalyze this.
"You win some and you lost some."
On this particular call, we won one.
Stop worrying about whether it was "right."
Just thank the Football Gods and move on.

 

[yukon cornelius]

was the ball still moving when he went to the ground? video clearly shows yes.....that's all you need to be conclusive.....ball was out before he broke plane, he did not establish/maintain possession as he went to the ground.....the recovery point doesn't matter.....as he was going to the ground (OOB at this point) he did not maintain possession......conclusive

dude, you're disagreeing with reality.....the video evidence is CLEAR he fumbled before the goaline, and CLEAR that the ball was still moving as he took the ball to the ground

and the NFL rules are clear in regards to both of these situations

so you're basically disagreeing simply because the stance you've taken for 8 pages of this thread is wrong?

 

[QuantumMechanic]

the competition committee has disagreed with you multiple times, though

so now you're saying the call was correct, and you don't like the rule? the raider fanbase says hello

The rule is the rule. Yes, if the offense fumbles through the EZ it is the defense's ball on the 20 and when it happens the ref should enforce it that way.

That doesn't make the rule any less stupid. It is stupid that an offensive fumble through the EZ gives the ball to the defense.

 

[archstanton543]

If the offense fumble the ball and it goes OOB an inch before the plane the offense keeps the ball on the 1-inch line. But if it goes OOB an inch after the plane the defense gets the ball. Makes no sense to me. Have it be essentially the same result if it went OOB an inch before the plane. Since there's already the precedent of bad things happening in the EZ resulting in the ball being marked at the 1, that's what I'd do here. An offensive fumble through the EZ makes it the offense's ball on the 1.

Are the endzones a different area of the field that the rest of it in the middle? They both have different rules that apply to them.

The fumble didn't happen in the endzone. The fumble happened in the air before a TD was scored and recovered out of bounds through the endzone and wasn't fully recovered anyways (by rule).

 

[bormio]

If the offense fumble the ball and it goes OOB an inch before the plane the offense keeps the ball on the 1-inch line. But if it goes OOB an inch after the plane the defense gets the ball. Makes no sense to me. Have it be essentially the same result if it went OOB an inch before the plane. Since there's already the precedent of bad things happening in the EZ resulting in the ball being marked at the 1, that's what I'd do here. An offensive fumble through the EZ makes it the offense's ball on the 1.

It is simple - don't fumble into the EZ - everyone knows the rule. If you fumble, it is on you.

 

[yukon cornelius]

The rule is the rule. Yes, if the offense fumbles through the EZ it is the defense's ball on the 20 and when it happens the ref should enforce it that way.

That doesn't make the rule any less stupid. It is stupid that an offensive fumble through the EZ gives the ball to the defense.

why? because you've been wrong for 8 pages and need an out? lol

so what should happen if the offense fumbles through it's own endzone? a do over?


the rule makes perfect sense.....don't fumble through the endzone and you don't have to worry about it

 

[QuantumMechanic]

The offense already gets a break by virtue of not getting a safety for that **** as it is. Leave the rule as it is imo

You do realize that a safety is when the ball is dead in your own endzone, right? That's the whole point of a safety -- to reward the defense for trapping you in your own endzone.

So there's no rationale whatsoever for making an offensive fumble through the other team's endzone be safety. So the fact that it's not currently a safety isn't any "break" for the offense, because it being a safety would be orders of magnitude dumber than what currently happens.

 

[Patstopia]

I went to take a leak during the review, when I came back expecting a kick off but instead saw the call, it gave me more sheer joy than I have felt since JE was hurt. This is going to be a long season, but it's moments like this against the Jets that I will remember long after this season is over!

 

[A Defiant Goose]

You do realize that a safety is when the ball is dead in your own endzone, right? That's the whole point of a safety -- to reward the defense for trapping you in your own endzone.

So there's no rationale whatsoever for making an offensive fumble through the other team's endzone be safety. So the fact that it's not currently a safety isn't any "break" for the offense, because it being a safety would be orders of magnitude dumber than what currently happens.

Yes I know what a safety is. Don't overanalyze my point which is that no points are given to any team, just a change of possession

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I'm pretty sure the rule is that to overturn the call on the field there needs to be conclusive evidence that the call on the field was wrong. And that it doesn't matter how the play actually happened relative to how the refs originally thought the play happened. Only the end state matters.

The call on the field was a TD. Thus there needs to be conclusive evidence that the result of the play was in fact not a TD. I don't believe there was such evidence because I don't believe S-J's recovery point is clear enough to definitively say he did not recover it in the endzone. So I think it should have stayed a TD.

I think the confusion is that this isn't a coach's challenge, where you're only allowed to challenge one aspect of the play. On a scoring review, all aspects are reviewed. So it's not focused on just whether there was conclusive evidence it was a TD or not.

And while reviewing all aspects of the play, it went beyond whether he was down or not. He clearly fumbled, then he clearly went to the ground with contact, so he had to maintain control of the ball, which he clearly didn't.

It's the Calvin Johnson catch all over again. You can hate the outcome, hate the rule, but you can't say it was incorrectly applied.

 

[yukon cornelius]

You do realize that a safety is when the ball is dead in your own endzone, right? That's the whole point of a safety -- to reward the defense for trapping you in your own endzone.

So there's no rationale whatsoever for making an offensive fumble through the other team's endzone be safety. So the fact that it's not currently a safety isn't any "break" for the offense, because it being a safety would be orders of magnitude dumber than what currently happens.

well, yeah, you're rewarding the defense for causing a fumble