News: DC: Jerry Jones: Odd To See Rules Reward 'Bad Plays'

[Rockport]

It’s a rule I’d want to make sure everyone is aware of. Once you block a kick if it bounces beyond the LOS don’t touch it unless you can recover it.

Sometimes, as in this case, it's just pure luck that the ball hit a Cowboy player.

 

[maryquality]

Sometimes, as in this case, it's just pure luck that the ball hit a Cowboy player.

Seems like the Cowboys always have the worst luck!!

 

[Brax]

I don't care if the rule has been there since Christ was a Cpl. a team that blocks a punt should not be punished because of it.

A team that touch's a live ball should.

 

[Rockport]

A team that touch's a live ball should.

Like I said, lets agree to disagree so you can stop your name calling.

 

[Brax]

I thought they said this rule was implemented as a result of the fumbling rule changes made in 1980’s or 90’s or was it the Leon Lett deal? Maybe that was last time we’d seen the rule imposed? They said when it was done. I forgot but it was more current than 60 years ago I believe.

It's not the holy roller rule or anything like that, it's always been this way, LL was a touch after a FG block that cost a game.

 

[Brax]

Like I said, lets agree to disagree so you can stop your name calling.

We can agree, as for name calling, you are the king of that around here LOL.

 

[Brax]

Technically once the ball crossed the LOS and we touched it’s considered a change of possession which if we had recovered it would have been our ball.

No doubt it was an obscure event rarely seen. And very rarely do you see a blocked punt go beyond the LOS and or not recovered by the blocking team.

I think rewarding them with a first down after change of possession since they didn’t cross the line to gain was most frustrating.

That's the key , end of beating a dead horse.

 

[Rockport]

We can agree, as for name calling, you are the king of that around here LOL.

I’ve never called someone stupid like you did.

 

[Brax]

I’ve never called someone stupid like you did.

You've done much worse. In context I wasn't calling anyone stupid, but it is a stupid take.

 

[Rockport]

You've done much worse. In context I wasn't calling anyone stupid, but it is a stupid take.

There you go again with the name calling.

 

[MWH1967]

a block punt that hits a defensive player should just be dead on the spot.

Preach!!

 

[OmerV]

If you have something to say, say it. I have no idea why you think what I said doesn't make sense. And I'm not the only one that thinks the current rule is faulty

 

[Diehardblues]

If you have something to say, say it. I have no idea why you think what I said doesn't make sense. And I'm not the only one that thinks the current rule is faulty

I think the rule is similar to like an interception and you fumble it and offense recovers. It’s a change of possession and 1st down even if you don’t reach the line to gain. Same for a fumble lost and defense fumbled it back.

Thats how this rule is interpreted. Once the defense blocks the punt if it goes beyond the LOS and they touch it’s considered a change of possession.

My guess is it happens so rarely Special Teams coaches aren’t coaching it. Didn’t look like we were even aware of the rule while Denver appeared to be.

 

[Brax]

I think the rule is similar to like an interception and you fumble it and offense recovers. It’s a change of possession and 1st down even if you don’t reach the line to gain. Same for a fumble lost and defense fumbled it back.

Thats how this rule is interpreted. Once the defense blocks the punt if it goes beyond the LOS and they touch it’s considered a change of possession.

My guess is it happens so rarely Special Teams coaches aren’t coaching it. Didn’t look like we were even aware of the rule while Denver appeared to be.

NW actually said he knew the rule but was trying to make a play, can't say I blame him for that.

 

[Diehardblues]

NW actually said he knew the rule but was trying to make a play, can't say I blame him for that.

That’s even worse then if he knew and still blew it. The only play to make after it crosses LOS if you aren’t absolutely certain you can recover is get the heck out of the way.

I’d have to go back and review the play but it seems like his touch was more inadvertently than an attempt to make a play. And why it was so frustrating or fluke like.

 

[RonnieT24]

NW actually said he knew the rule but was trying to make a play, can't say I blame him for that.

I don't blame him either. It was an instinctive play to try to grab the ball. I don't fault him for that at all. My main reasoning behind wanting the rule to be changed is that it stinks. And always has. Just because it's been that way forever doesn't make it correct. The rule was probably written 60 years ago .. the game is different now.. They change rules all the time to try and improve the product. IMHO changing this one would do just that.

 

[Kevinicus]

There you go again with the name calling.

That's not name calling

You might be protesting a little too much.

 

[RonnieT24]

That’s even worse then if he knew and still blew it. The only play to make after it crosses LOS if you aren’t absolutely certain you can recover is get the heck out of the way.

I’d have to go back and review the play but it seems like his touch was more inadvertently than an attempt to make a play. And why it was so frustrating or fluke like.

Come on man.. knowing the rule doesn't automatically mean you make a play. I just watched the play again and it certainly looks to me like he moves toward the ball with eyes on it. He just didn't secure it.. but the ball bounced at the line of scrimmage and came up on him quick. Ironically he touches it less than a yard from the line of scrimmage. If he had been one step quicker it would have hit him behind the line of scrimmage.. I wonder what the rule is then?

 

[OmerV]

I think the rule is similar to like an interception and you fumble it and offense recovers. It’s a change of possession and 1st down even if you don’t reach the line to gain. Same for a fumble lost and defense fumbled it back.

Thats how this rule is interpreted. Once the defense blocks the punt if it goes beyond the LOS and they touch it’s considered a change of possession.

My guess is it happens so rarely Special Teams coaches aren’t coaching it. Didn’t look like we were even aware of the rule while Denver appeared to be.

Yes, that is how the rule currently works. I'm not disputing that. But to me there should be a difference in that with the scenarios you referred to the defense actually physically establishes possession of the ball, then fumbles it. That's not the case with the rule now.

As it is the rule treats it as if merely contacting the ball establishes possession by the receiving team, even if with just a toe, and even if that contact is entirely inadvertent. As I mentioned before, currently a blocked punt could just ricochet into an unsuspecting member of the receiving team a mere 1 foot beyond the line of scrimmage and the punting team could recover for a first down. Pure luck and a flawed rule would determine the outcome rather than a 1st down being earned.

To me the ball should be treated as a fumble when the kick is blocked. The defense hasn't yet established possession, so the outcome would depend on who recovers the ball, and where. If the punting team recovers the ball beyond the first down marker, or even before the marker and advances it to the first down, they keep the ball. If not, it should turn over.

 

[OmerV]

A team that touch's a live ball should.

Teams touch a live ball on fumbles all the time. That doesn't mean if the team that started the play in possession of the ball recovers the fumble they no longer have to reach the first down marker to get the first down.