Tuck rule

[Clippers of Nfl]

I have ALWAYS thought the raiders were cheated in 2002. Always! 1 im a bills fan. 2. the rule doesnt make sense.

 

We lost to the patriots yesterday and i'm bored so the tuck rule came to mind. out of the blue. anyway i always thought it was a stupid rule. didnt really get it too much as it is not really called that much anymore anyway. so i do a search on it and the rule states this:

 

while STOPPING his PASSING motion and/or bringing the ball back to ones body, hence tucking it, IT IS STILL CONSIDERED A FORWARD PASS.

 

how is that a forward pass???? in the rule it states stopping his pass!!!!!what the f?????? the rule is basically descriging a qb who thought about passing and then decided to tuck the ball BY STOPPING HIS PASS. isnt this qb fair game to be tackled, sacked, and fumbled???

 

and the patriots went on to win their 1st superbowl. THEY DIDNT BELONG THERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

i dont care about them. i dont care that they won 2 more sb. but they did not deserve their 1st.

 

i know i like to kid alot on this board. but am i missing something? can i get help?

[Big Turk]

I have ALWAYS thought the raiders were cheated in 2002. Always! 1 im a bills fan. 2. the rule doesnt make sense.

 

We lost to the patriots yesterday and i'm bored so the tuck rule came to mind. out of the blue. anyway i always thought it was a stupid rule. didnt really get it too much as it is not really called that much anymore anyway. so i do a search on it and the rule states this:

 

while STOPPING his PASSING motion and/or bringing the ball back to ones body, hence tucking it, IT IS STILL CONSIDERED A FORWARD PASS.

 

how is that a forward pass???? in the rule it states stopping his pass!!!!!what the f?????? the rule is basically descriging a qb who thought about passing and then decided to tuck the ball BY STOPPING HIS PASS. isnt this qb fair game to be tackled, sacked, and fumbled???

 

and the patriots went on to win their 1st superbowl. THEY DIDNT BELONG THERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

i dont care about them. i dont care that they won 2 more sb. but they did not deserve their 1st.

 

i know i like to kid alot on this board. but am i missing something? can i get help?

 

If QBs were smart they would just pump fake every play and they could never get sacked and fumble...

[NoSaint]

Curious: tuck rule in relation to intentional grounding... If it's anticipated to be a spike in the pocket... It's not a fumble, shouldn't it atleast be intentional grounding?

[San Jose Bills Fan]

How can anyone who has watched football look at that particular play and conclude that it was anything but a fumble?

 

One of the worst calls of all time…both because of the call in and of itself, and because of the severe injustice it did to the Raiders.

[TC in St. Louis]

That was a total injustice. They made up the call on the spot. Nobody had ever heard of it, it had never been called.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

That was a total injustice. They made up the call on the spot. Nobody had ever heard of it, it had never been called.

Also…has it ever been called since?

[The Cincinnati Kid]

I think it makes perfect sense. The QB is attempting to pass, when hit tries to tuck the ball so not to fumble. The QB arm is moving forward, he has be hit by defender and ball comes out during forward motion of arm. Incomplete. Its incomplete everytime. Always has been, always will be.

[AxelRipper]

Curious: tuck rule in relation to intentional grounding... If it's anticipated to be a spike in the pocket... It's not a fumble, shouldn't it atleast be intentional grounding?

 

 

Think of that as a screen pass... There are eligible receivers all around the QB, and he "throws an incomplete pass" at one of them, that just happens to be directly into the ground. If he were to drop back and throw it at his RB who is standing right next to him and miss, as long as it was a "forward pass" it would be an incomplete pass.

[Bill Brasky]

It was almost 10 years ago. Let go of your bitterness

[Clippers of Nfl]

Also…has it ever been called since?

it was called the next year like 1 or twice under the games i watched. maybe more.... who knows. but i havent seen it called this year and i watch a lot of football. too much probably.

 

I think it makes perfect sense. The QB is attempting to pass, when hit tries to tuck the ball so not to fumble. The QB arm is moving forward, he has be hit by defender and ball comes out during forward motion of arm. Incomplete. Its incomplete everytime. Always has been, always will be.

see i agree with you if the arm is moving FORWARD like a pass. IF

 

but for the tuck rule to APPLY the arm has to be moving inward towards his body, hence tucking. now do you see why the rule makes no sense.

 

if in the act of passing you change your mind and bring the ball towards your body, BE MORE CAREFUll. you drop it, you lose it. THIS MAKES SENSE.

 

It was almost 10 years ago. Let go of your bitterness

its just annoying when i think about it. i dont think about it often. this is normal.

trust me i have bigger things to worry about.

[Jared]

1) Rule seems odd, but they put in a black and white rule specifically so there wouldn't be any ref judgment involved.

 

2) The rule is called fairly consistently, and had been called earlier that season at least twice, including once on national television.

 

3) The only reason this instance is remembered is because it happened right at the end of the playoff game and the Patriots eventually won the Super Bowl. If the Pats get blown out by the Rams, no one remembers the "Tuck Rule" except as a minor oddity.

 

4) Hard to get upset about refs calling the game exactly as is written in the rule book.

[Clippers of Nfl]

1) Rule seems odd, but they put in a black and white rule specifically so there wouldn't be any ref judgment involved.

 

2) The rule is called fairly consistently, and had been called earlier that season at least twice, including once on national television.

 

3) The only reason this instance is remembered is because it happened right at the end of the playoff game and the Patriots eventually won the Super Bowl. If the Pats get blown out by the Rams, no one remembers the "Tuck Rule" except as a minor oddity.

 

4) Hard to get upset about refs calling the game exactly as is written in the rule book.

of course its not the refs fault. i am just stating the stupidness of the rule itself.

[DC Tom]

Also…has it ever been called since?

 

Yes, but rarely, and one gets the sense that it's only called to justify the original bull **** call.

 

Interesting note: roughly the same play happened a couple seasons later in a Pats-Raiders rematch, and it wasn't called. Quite possibly because Al Davis threatened to put a hit out on the refs if it were.

[The Cincinnati Kid]

Grab a football and pretend to throw it. Then pretend to start top throw it and deciding to tuck it. The arm is, in fact, moving forward. Yes the arm is moving toward your body, however it is absolutely moving forward. Therefore if the ball comes out then it is, by definition, an incomplete pass. Its really a simple rule and it just has a bad name. If the guy calls it incomplete way back when then it is known as an incompletion, not the infamous tuck rule.

[Clippers of Nfl]

Grab a football and pretend to throw it. Then pretend to start top throw it and deciding to tuck it. The arm is, in fact, moving forward. Yes the arm is moving toward your body, however it is absolutely moving forward. Therefore if the ball comes out then it is, by definition, an incomplete pass. Its really a simple rule and it just has a bad name. If the guy calls it incomplete way back when then it is known as an incompletion, not the infamous tuck rule.

if your intention is to INTERRUPT your pass to tuck it towards your body, its still fair game for a fumble.

 

by the way you need to stop defending the RULE. watch the PLAY. woodson surprised brady and the ball was forced out.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Grab a football and pretend to throw it. Then pretend to start top throw it and deciding to tuck it. The arm is, in fact, moving forward. Yes the arm is moving toward your body, however it is absolutely moving forward. Therefore if the ball comes out then it is, by definition, an incomplete pass. Its really a simple rule and it just has a bad name. If the guy calls it incomplete way back when then it is known as an incompletion, not the infamous tuck rule.

Firstly let me state that I am a total Buffalo Bills fan and don't have room in my heart to cheer for another team. There's many teams I don't like but point being, I am not a Raiders fan. This call was one of the great screw jobs of all time.

 

http://www.nfl.com/v...s-The-Tuck-Rule

 

Listen to what Brady says. Listen to what longtime Boston Globe writer Bob Ryan says about the rule.

 

In almost 40 years of watching football before that game, I had never seen that rule invoked. Never.

 

I don't care if his arm was moving forward…he had no intention of throwing the ball. It was a pump fake. The ball was knocked loose. Making it a fumble to everyone in the universe except for Little Wally Coleman.

 

And nothing boils my blood like a miscarriage of justice.

Edited December 30, 2010 by San Jose Bills Fan

[Bill Brasky]

I think it was used earlier that year. I want to say the jets were the beneficiaries iirc.p

[Talley56]

I think it makes perfect sense. The QB is attempting to pass, when hit tries to tuck the ball so not to fumble. The QB arm is moving forward, he has be hit by defender and ball comes out during forward motion of arm. Incomplete. Its incomplete everytime. Always has been, always will be.

Attempting to throw the ball is not the same thing as actually throwing it. It shouldn't matter if your arm is going forward, if you don't release it, it should still be considered you having possession of the ball and thus if you lose it at any point it should be considered a fumble.

[RJ (not THAT RJ)]

The rule has never made sense, either in general or in the context of the specific play. If applied consistently, almost every fumble that occurs during a sack could be invalidated. It was a terrible call, very suspect at the time, and the subsequent legalistic contortions have only been the NFL's effort to try and cloud the issue and avoid admitting it was a terrible call. Period.

[DC Tom]

Firstly let me state that I am a total Buffalo Bills fan and don't have room in my heart to cheer for another team. There's many teams I don't like but point being, I am not a Raiders fan. This call was one of the great screw jobs of all time.

 

http://www.nfl.com/v...s-The-Tuck-Rule

 

Listen to what Brady says. Listen to what longtime Boston Globe writer Bob Ryan says about the rule.

 

In almost 40 years of watching football before that game, I had never seen that rule invoked. Never.

 

I don't care if his arm was moving forward…he had no intention of throwing the ball. It was a pump fake. The ball was knocked loose. Making it a fumble to everyone in the universe except for Little Wally Coleman.

 

And nothing boils my blood like a miscarriage of justice.

 

I never understood how they called it an incomplete forward pass when - as is clear in that video - he was holding the ball with two hands.

 

Maybe not the greatest sports screw-job of all time...probably the greatest since Maradona's Hand of God goal.