Touch back rule

[ksadler1]

So funny how the majority of Raiders fans think the touch back rule is stupid and should be spotted at the point it was fumbled and given back to the team that fumbled. Are you fricken kidding me???

 

[basstapp]

Well anywhere else on the field you can't fumble forward. I completely understand their frustration, just like I understand the Steeler's with the catch rule.

 

[Clove]

Raiders fans = dumb

 

[Tommy]

Well anywhere else on the field you can't fumble forward. I completely understand their frustration, just like I understand the Steeler's with the catch rule.

Yes I completely understand their frustration. I am sure if we were the team that fumbled and they won the game they would still be upset with the rule. [sarcasm off]

 

[MrPeanutbutter]

Well anywhere else on the field you can't fumble forward. I completely understand their frustration, just like I understand the Steeler's with the catch rule.

What's your suggestion? Just put Carr down at the one? I kind of feel like the Raiders should have gotten the ball at the 25.

 

[ksadler1]

Well anywhere else on the field you can't fumble forward. I completely understand their frustration, just like I understand the Steeler's with the catch rule.

This isn't anywhere else on the field. This is a specific rule for the end zone. If a returner is running a kick back and gets hit at the 10 yard line and fumbles the ball backwards out of the EZ should his team get the ball batack the 10?

 

[viman96]

I do not like the rule but it is the rule. Why is a fumble out of bounds between endzones handled differently than the endzone?

 

[adamknite]

It's not like it's some obscure rule that is 100% subjective that never gets called... That's been the rule as far back as I can remember. Hell there is a pretty historic case of it happening to us in a Super Bowl.

 

[dogunwo]

I do not like the rule but it is the rule. Why is a fumble out of bounds between endzones handled differently than the endzone?

Where should the ball be spotted then?

 

[Bleedblue1111]

I think if you fumble out of bounds it should be a turn over as well, where it went out. It's like they get rewarded for not holding on to the pigskin.

 

[ksadler1]

I do not like the rule but it is the rule. Why is a fumble out of bounds between endzones handled differently than the endzone?

Because the EZ is technically not in the field of play. Once the ball crosses the goal line nothing else matters.

 

[Tommy]

This isn't anywhere else on the field. This is a specific rule for the end zone. If a returner is running a kick back and gets hit at the 10 yard line and fumbles the ball backwards out of the EZ should his team get the ball batack the 10?

Or if your QB gets sacked at his 1yd line and he fumbles backwards out of the end zone what should happen? Should they get the ball back at the 1yd line?

There is nothing wrong with this rule. It only becomes a problem when the Dallas Cowboys benefit from it.

 

[MrPeanutbutter]

Oakland fans can **** because the rules are the rules. It's a dumb rule, fine. Carr still should have known better.

 

[viman96]

Where should the ball be spotted then?

I do not know. Maybe the goalline of where the player went out of bounds. I do not like position is handled differently in the field vs the endzone.

 

[mmohican29]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this rule. In fact it is a good rule.

1) Ball Security is paramount in football. Why reward a team for failing to protect posession when a scoring opportunity arises?

2) A loose ball in the end zone caused by the defense should never reward the offense. Otherwise end of game situations could turn into rugby scrums into the end zone.

3) Every NFL player knows this rule exists. If they choose idiocy or potential glory over points, that's on them.

I feel for Carr who wanted to win and that was why he extended toward the goal line, and do not fault him for doing so. But it was not the ideal play with regard to time and 1st down yardage attained. He gambled and lost. Period.

 

[viman96]

Because the EZ is technically not in the field of play. Once the ball crosses the goal line nothing else matters.

I get that but in those situatuons there is no fumble. The goalline was crossed with position. Play over.

Last night the fumble occurred in the field of play and rolled out of bounds in the endzone.

 

[jazzcat22]

I do not like the rule but it is the rule. Why is a fumble out of bounds between endzones handled differently than the endzone?

So a team fumbles out of bounds, should the other team get the ball?
Completely different situations.

A team should not be rewarded by keeping the ball if they lose the ball on a scoring play, as opposed to just losing it out of bounds.
If a team misses a FG by trying it on 3rd down, they do not get to keep it for 4th down if the ball goes beyond the LOS or through the end zone. So is that a fair rule also?

 

[adamknite]

I do not like the rule but it is the rule. Why is a fumble out of bounds between endzones handled differently than the endzone?

Because the endzones are far more important than any other position on the field. If you fumble it out the back of your opponents endzone it's a safety, when it's out your endzone you lose the ball. Thats because when ball is in the endzone the rules change due to the importance of the those two spots to the game. Anywhere else the offense gets the benefit (aka: They don't lose the ball if it goes out of bounds), in the endzones the benefit is given to the defense.

 

[Idgit]

I don't get the big deal on this one. It's a weird rule, but it's been that way forever. It didn't sneak up on anybody. Sure, it would totally suck to lose on that play, but it's not like it was a subjective call at all. It was a clear turnover, plain and simple. Carr fumbled the ball on the goal line in an unnecessary attempt to stretch for the game winning TD. It might just as easily have been fumbled in the field of play and recovered by Dallas.

He's just got to be smarter with the football.

 

[viman96]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this rule. In fact it is a good rule.

Is it though?

1) Ball Security is paramount in football. Why reward a team for failing to protect posession when a scoring opportunity arises?

If this happened anywhere between endzones, the offense retains position. Why is it any different? The offense is rewarded position even though they lost control of the ball.

2) A loose ball in the end zone caused by the defense should never reward the offense. Otherwise end of game situations could turn into rugby scrums into the end zone.

See above

3) Every NFL player knows this rule exists. If they choose idiocy or potential glory over points, that's on them.

Agreed

I feel for Carr who wanted to win and that was why he extended toward the goal line, and do not fault him for doing so. But it was not the ideal play with regard to time and 1st down yardage attained. He gambled and lost. Period.

I do not. He went for it and failed. Just part of the game.