Hammered a Lot Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 on the non fumble call @ the 2:11 make 2nd qtr eagles vikes game.What the hell does that mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 on the non fumble call @ the 2:11 make 2nd qtr eagles vikes game.What the hell does that mean? 207383[/snapback] He needed to have both feet in bounds after stepping out, before he could touch the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodnarb Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 if a defender goes out of bounds on a play, he has to re-establish himself by getting both feet on the field before he can claim a live ball, be it on a fumble or INT. It was the right call, but they explained it poorly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammered a Lot Posted January 16, 2005 Author Share Posted January 16, 2005 I saw that he had one foot in bounds than fell on the ball. Thanks for explaining, I thought it was a new "Patriots" rule of some sort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thailog80 Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 I saw that he had one foot in bounds than fell on the ball. Thanks for explaining, I thought it was a new "Patriots" rule of some sort. 207391[/snapback] No...those start at 4:45pm today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 Thanks for explaining, I thought it was a new "Patriots" rule of some sort. 207391[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 I understand the ruling...but why the rule? It doesnt make sense to have that rule at all. There must be a reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts