Fumble into endzone rule needs to change

[Mojo44]

2 minutes ago, SinceThe70s said:

 

They puked it through the end zone and shouldn't be given a second chance to rectify their f up. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I get your point and I'm not militant that it should absolutely be a turn-over. What makes absolutely no sense to me is putting the ball at the 20.

A rather severe penalty is indicated if a team tries to fumble a ball forward into the end zone hoping one of their players recovers it to score a touchdown, usually in a desperate situation. Again, all aspects of the rule make perfect sense as far as being fair and simplifying of the game.I just don’t see the problem here.

[SinceThe70s]

1 minute ago, Mojo44 said:

A rather severe penalty is indicated if a team tries to fumble a ball forward into the end zone hoping one of their players recovers it to score a touchdown, usually in a desperate situation. Again, all aspects of the rule make perfect sense as far as being fair and simplifying of the game.I just don’t see the problem here.

 

The "desperate situation"  intentional forward fumble  was addressed after the Raiders Holy Roller in 1978:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roller_(American_football)

 

Unless I'm mistaken, what's being discussed here is an unintentional forward fumble through the end zone. Did the play today happen on 4th and goal? 

 

[Nick the Greek]

Ok so should we do away with the safety while we’re at it? 

 

Its the end zone, and it’s treated differently than the rest of the field. Don’t get tackled in your own end zone, and don’t fumble through it when trying to score. The end zone is treated differently, and I have no problem with that.

 

not to mention that this rule has probably been this way since the rules of football were written in the 1900s. It would be like getting rid of the forward pass. It would be unethical. 

Edited November 26, 2018 by Idandria

[TremaineAve]

3 hours ago, Buffalo Barbarian said:

If a team fumbles through the endzone it SHOULD NOT go to the other team.

 

They did nothing to get the ball they don't deserve the ball. It should stay with the team that had possession, just like it does when goes out bounds on the sidelines. That rule is really one of the worst in the league.

 

 

This has happened many times and did again today in Pittsburgh, and needs to stop.

 

 

Completely agree. Same dumb rule exists in college. If a team is driving and the defense is doing nothing, the defense shouldn’t be rewarded with the ball. The defense was playing poorly, not stopping a drive, and doing nothing to deserve the ball. An unlucky fumble mistake though the end zone should not award the crappy playing defense in any way.

[SinceThe70s]

1 minute ago, TremaineAve said:

Completely agree. Same dumb rule exists in college. If a team is driving and the defense is doing nothing, the defense shouldn’t be rewarded with the ball. The defense was playing poorly, not stopping a drive, and doing nothing to deserve the ball. An unlucky fumble mistake though the end zone should not award the crappy playing defense in any way.

 

What if the defense forced the fumble?

[TremaineAve]

22 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

I agree......

 

This is exact scenario where the rule is unfair and needs to be changed. The defense was getting gashed, doing nothing, the offensive player fu,blew the ball on his own and all of a sudden defense gets automatic possess on the 25??!! The defense did nothing to deserve the ball. Rule needs to be changed, in college too.

1 minute ago, SinceThe70s said:

 

What if the defense forced the fumble?

If the defense forces the fumble, then the offense should get the ball back at the point where the runner lost the ball.

[WhoTom]

1 hour ago, Cripple Creek said:

and give it to which team?

 

The team that had possession of the ball when it was lost, just like a fumble that goes out of bounds.

[NoSaint]

5 minutes ago, TremaineAve said:

Completely agree. Same dumb rule exists in college. If a team is driving and the defense is doing nothing, the defense shouldn’t be rewarded with the ball. The defense was playing poorly, not stopping a drive, and doing nothing to deserve the ball. An unlucky fumble mistake though the end zone should not award the crappy playing defense in any way.

 

Wouldnt creating a fumble be a great defensive play, and frankly more worthy of earning possession than a player that doesn’t show care for the ball?

[TremaineAve]

Just now, NoSaint said:

 

Wouldnt creating a fumble be a great defensive play, and frankly more worthy of earning possession than a player that doesn’t show care for the ball?

I’m talking about the scenario where the defense did nothing to cause the fumble, the offensive player simply futzed it through the end zone. In that scenario, the defense deserves no reward.

2 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

Wouldnt creating a fumble be a great defensive play, and frankly more worthy of earning possession than a player that doesn’t show care for the ball?

But in your scenario, where the defender caused the fumble, then the offense should retain possession at the point where he offensive player fumbled.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

29 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

So ... that would encourage "fumbling" forward, right? Look, rules are made not just to be fair in a particular situation, but to discourage certain practices that overall are considered to be unfair.  Now in the Broncos-steelers game, there's no question that the receiver wasn't trying to advance the ball into the endzone by fumbling, so you could try to alter the rule to take into account intent of the runner, but that would just open up a whole new can of worms. I don't have a problem with the rule the way it is ... it's objective, it appears to encourage the offense to value ball security over lunging, etc. ... it works.

 

If it goes to the spot to the spot of the fumble then fumbling forward would have no bearing on it.  This is not hard to figure out ... It does not work.

 

 

[SinceThe70s]

6 minutes ago, TremaineAve said:

 

If the defense forces the fumble, then the offense should get the ball back at the point where the runner lost the ball.

 

If that's your opinion than I don't understand why you made the point below. Aren't you asking for the same outcome in either scenario?

 

"The defense was playing poorly, not stopping a drive, and doing nothing to deserve the ball. An unlucky fumble mistake though the end zone should not award the crappy playing defense in any way."

 

 

[Buffalo Barbarian]

11 minutes ago, SinceThe70s said:

 

What if the defense forced the fumble?

 

So if the defense causes a fumble on the field but don't recover it then they should get the ball ?

33 minutes ago, Mojo44 said:

I completely agree with all of the posters who state that the rule is fine just the way it is. It is to prevent an intentional fumble forward in the end zone in a desperate situation when a team is trying to score a touchdown. Since it is too much responsibility on the referee to determine whether or not a fumble was intentional the rule stands, simply, as it is. It makes perfect sense and no change is needed.

 

wrong

 

 

[NoSaint]

12 minutes ago, TremaineAve said:

I’m talking about the scenario where the defense did nothing to cause the fumble, the offensive player simply futzed it through the end zone. In that scenario, the defense deserves no reward.

But in your scenario, where the defender caused the fumble, then the offense should retain possession at the point where he offensive player fumbled.

 

Why “should” they? 

[SinceThe70s]

1 minute ago, Buffalo Barbarian said:

 

So if the defense causes a fumble on the field but don't recover it then they should get the ball ?

 

Nope. But as Idandria pointed out, the end zone is different.

 

I'm surprised nobody brought up the fumble out of bounds comparison where the possessing team retains the ball. That's basically what you're lobbying for (except where the ball gets spotted after the play).  To some of us the end zone is different. I get where you're coming from, just don't agree.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

1 minute ago, SinceThe70s said:

 

Nope. But as Idandria pointed out, the end zone is different.

 

I'm surprised nobody brought up the fumble out of bounds comparison where the possessing team retains the ball. That's basically what you're lobbying for (except where the ball gets spotted after the play).  To some of us the end zone is different. I get where you're coming from, just don't agree.

 

No it is not ,put the friggin ball at the spot of the fumbe, holy crap it's not hard.

 

 

[TremaineAve]

2 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

Why “should” they? 

 

Well they certainly shouldn’t automatically lose possession.if the defense doesn’t recover it. The defense was getting gashed up to that point and should not be rewarded for playing poorly possession by simply forcing a fumble. The next logical thing to do is place the ball where the runner lost possession. In either scenario whether the defense forced or the offense itself caused the fumble.

[NoSaint]

2 minutes ago, TremaineAve said:

 

Well they certainly shouldn’t automatically lose possession.if the defense doesn’t recover it. The defense was getting gashed up to that point and should not be rewarded for playing poorly possession by simply forcing a fumble. The next logical thing to do is place the ball where the runner lost possession. In either scenario whether the defense forced or the offense itself caused the fumble.

 

So the length of the drive and quality of the hit effect your take? What if it’s the first play of the drive and a huge defensive play? You suddenly feel differently about who earned possession compared to a player being reckless?

[The Frankish Reich]

Just now, Buffalo Barbarian said:

 

No it is not ,put the friggin ball at the spot of the fumbe, holy crap it's not hard.

 

 

Why?  You are expressing your personal preference that would tilt in favor of the fumbling offense, which is all well and good. But you are not providing anything resembling an objective reason why your preference would improve the game, lead to a fairer result, etc. Some of us have pointed out that the rule exists in order to deter deliberate fumbling forward. Maybe we should also think of it as a rule that ought to deter a lot of the lunging forward with the ball to break the plane of the goal line that occurs many times a week nowadays in the NFL. Maybe you enjoy that; maybe others don't. Arguing about rules changes requires an argument, not just "put the friggin ball at the spot of the fumbe"

[Virgil]

3 hours ago, Buffalo Barbarian said:

If a team fumbles through the endzone it SHOULD NOT go to the other team.

 

They did nothing to get the ball they don't deserve the ball. It should stay with the team that had possession, just like it does when goes out bounds on the sidelines. That rule is really one of the worst in the league.

 

 

This has happened many times and did again today in Pittsburgh, and needs to stop.

 

 

 

What do you suggest as an alternative?  Offense keeps the ball at the 20 like a reverse touchback?

[SinceThe70s]

1 minute ago, Virgil said:

 

What do you suggest as an alternative?  Offense keeps the ball at the 20 like a reverse touchback?

 

Now that is an interesting addition to the conversation.