November 30, 200619 yr I also think too much interpretation is going on, if you are trying to call this a pass then what about this..... a runner is running and his arms are pumping forward and backwards, the ball comes out propelled forward by the action of his arms it is a pass, not a fumble? I think we have all seen players fumble the ball without being hit and every time the ball is going forward while the arms are swinging forward why is this not a forward pass also. I do not think the rule states the position of the arm or the players intent. What do you all think. Let me know. It was called because it was an INTENTIONAL act. The rule was put in place originally to prevent a player intentionally fumbling the ball forward to gain additional yards, it makes no difference whether the player is in fact attempting to gain extra yards or celebrating. The situation that you are talking about would be an accidental occurance and not subject to the rule, however the yards gained by the offense after the fumble would be negated. If the offense recovers a forward fumble the ball reverts to the spot of the fumble. As far as what constitutes an intentional forward fumble, that is up to the ref, in this case it is obvious that the player intended to throw the ball forward.
December 2, 200619 yr Here's an article on ESPN.com about this very topic. Scroll way down to the bottom to the section titled "Adventures in Officiating." It states that any kind of arm motion that causes the ball to go forward is a pass, either underhanded or overhanded. That's why a shovel pass is underhanded, but not considered a forward lateral. It's legal behind the LOS or illegal if past the LOS. If the ball is tossed backwards, it's a fumble. If the ball is "intentionally" fumbled forward, it's a forward pass, and may be illegal. This clearly wasn't an intentional fumble. Plaxico Burress did this a few years ago and it was called a fumble. The ball went backwards after he spiked it in the ground. The call was the correct call for the way the rules are stated. Whether or not that's the way it should be is debatable. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/061128
December 2, 200619 yr Here's an article on ESPN.com about this very topic. Scroll way down to the bottom to the section titled "Adventures in Officiating." It states that any kind of arm motion that causes the ball to go forward is a pass, either underhanded or overhanded. That's why a shovel pass is underhanded, but not considered a forward lateral. It's legal behind the LOS or illegal if past the LOS. If the ball is tossed backwards, it's a fumble. If the ball is "intentionally" fumbled forward, it's a forward pass, and may be illegal. This clearly wasn't an intentional fumble. Plaxico Burress did this a few years ago and it was called a fumble. The ball went backwards after he spiked it in the ground. The call was the correct call for the way the rules are stated. Whether or not that's the way it should be is debatable. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/061128 I knew you'd see things my way eventually...
December 2, 200619 yr Penalizing uneeded spikes would help out the refs a bit. I agree. Delay of game or taunting for any spike that is not in the endzone. Why can't we just hand the ball to the ref and act like we have made a ten yard catch before? Same goes for all the celebrating on D after a sack or big tackle. Is this not what these guys are paid to do? Some may say these behaviors lend themselves to the entertainment factor of the game. I am there to watch gifted athletes play football, not to watch grown men behave like idiots. I fail to see the entertainment. On the other hand an anti spike rule would add another burden to the hapless referees, they definetly would find a way to screw up that kind of call:madman:
December 2, 200619 yr I agree. Delay of game or taunting for any spike that is not in the endzone. Why can't we just hand the ball to the ref and act like we have made a ten yard catch before? Same goes for all the celebrating on D after a sack or big tackle. Is this not what these guys are paid to do? Some may say these behaviors lend themselves to the entertainment factor of the game. I am there to watch gifted athletes play football, not to watch grown men behave like idiots. I fail to see the entertainment. On the other hand an anti spike rule would add another burden to the hapless referees, they definetly would find a way to screw up that kind of call:madman: I couldn't agree more. Well, maybe I could, but it would be difficult.
December 2, 200619 yr I knew you'd see things my way eventually... Yeah, I think I'm going to be sick now. :lol: :creepy:
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.