News: Competition Committee sees no need to change rule on fumble through the endzone

[J12B]

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...rule-on-fumbling-through-end-zone-per-report/

 

[Vanilla2]

Agree.

 

[_sturt_]

I hate the rule.

But it's the only logical way to handle that situation in the context of all the other rules.

Oh well.

 

[J12B]

I hate the rule.

But it's the only logical way to handle that situation in the context of all the other rules.

Oh well.

The only option I'd be ok with is if it were counted as a penalty against the offense.

Like intentional grounding.

Loss of down and 15 yard penalty.

 

[big dog cowboy]

It happens very infrequently. Just once maybe twice a year. So it's hard to get too very worked up about it. There are bigger issues that need addressed and fixed.

 

[_sturt_]

The only option I'd be ok with is if it were counted as a penalty against the offense.

Like intentional grounding.

Loss of down and 15 yard penalty.

But where's the logic in the idea that a fumble is a penalty?

Right?

It's unpleasant, but any other option amounts to a contortion, and accordingly, opens up a whole other box of unintended possible precedents for other contortions.

 

[gimmesix]

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...rule-on-fumbling-through-end-zone-per-report/

I still think that the offense should retain the ball, just like it would if a player fumbled out of bounds and there was no clear recovery. Give the offense the ball at the spot of the fumble.

 

[Nav22]

Keep the rule as is.

You don't want the turnover? Don't fumble near the opponent's goal line.

That is the defense's endzone to defend. If you fumble in the defense's endzone, you deserve the turnover.

 

[J12B]

I still think that the offense should retain the ball, just like it would if a player fumbled out of bounds and there was no clear recovery. Give the offense the ball at the spot of the fumble.

100% disagree.

It's the cost of being negligent by the ball carrier attempting to get a TD just by reaching the ball out there.

Don't want a turnover, then protect the ball better.

 

[America's Cowboy]

Keep the rule as is.

You don't want the turnover? Don't fumble near the opponent's goal line.

That is the defense's endzone to defend. If you fumble in the defense's endzone, you deserve the turnover.

 

[Reality]

 

[sacase]

I think it should be treated like the ball going out of bounds. It's the only thing that makes real sense. Spot of the fumble.

 

[The Quest for Six]

I think it should be treated like the ball going out of bounds. It's the only thing that makes real sense. Spot of the fumble.

out of bounds on the sideline is different than the goal line, there's nothing wrong with the rule as it stands..

 

[Runwildboys]

How about just a loss of down and the offense retains possession at the previous spot, if the defense didn't recover the ball or actively cause the fumble?

If the defense strips the ball, or hits the ball carrier hard enough to cause the fumble, then it goes to the defense.

 

[fivetwos]

Good.

Maybe consider not diving for the pylon with the ball.

 

[Quickdraw]

The current rule should stand.

 

[he-is-bonafide]

How about 100%, all the time, fumbles out of bounds cannot advance the ball from the spot of the fumble. Wouldn’t matter then where on the field it occurs and would be consistent. I think the extreme difference in results between the fumble going out 1 foot before vs after the goal line is what fans object to.

 

[Pola_pe_a]

I like the rule. In a game that completely favors the O having one rule that’s slants towards the D is fine.

 

[DogFace]

It’s a good rule. If you fumble through the end zone you lose possession. The end zone is what makes it different. Hold on to it there and you’re rewarded points. Lose it just before reaching it to the point it goes through the end zone and out, you lose possession.

It’s not controversial.

 

[Big_D]

the end zone is the opponent’s territory, I agree the rule should stay!