[Vague Title] Was it Fumble

[Cray51]

NFL just set the standard - if your arm moves forward, and even after completely the throwing motion without actually throwing the ball you get hit and lose it, it’s and incompletion.

 

if I’m a QB I’m pumping that arm forward constantly.  That way you are gifted an incompletion if you ever do get hit and fumble…

[co_springs_billsfan]

5 minutes ago, Cray51 said:

NFL just set the standard - if your arm moves forward, and even after completely the throwing motion without actually throwing the ball you get hit and lose it, it’s and incompletion.

 

if I’m a QB I’m pumping that arm forward constantly.  That way you are gifted an incompletion if you ever do get hit and fumble…

And apparently no intentional grounding on those types of plays either.  Quite the loophole!

[LABILLBACKER]

44 minutes ago, sven233 said:

It is such a grey area.  Was his arm going forward?  Yes.  Was he attempting a pass?  Absolutely not.

 

Supposedly, they got rid of the tuck rule several years ago.  In my opinion, yes, that is absolutely a fumble.  But, it is such a strange play and you know the league would never call that a fumble on a select few star QBs for sure.

That was a classic "stopped arm motion" tuck with the ball coming out as the hand stopped. Even when the shield changes a classic miss from years ago, they still manage to butcher the call after seeing it in slo-mo?  The NFL is so dumb it can't get out of its own way.

[JoshAllin]

Would have been another huge play by Bernard. Looked like he held on then let go of the ball

[MJS]

If the tuck rule does not apply to that, what the heck does it apply to? They need to change the rule if so. Rodgers was clearly NOT trying to throw the ball. That should be a fumble all day.

[Dr.Sack]

So many bad calls, the game felt artificially controlled by the NFL officials / HQ to prevent a Bills rout. MNF costs a lot of $. 

[Spiderweb]

6 hours ago, Riverboat Ritchie said:

Not sure I completely understood the Rogers incomplete/fumble call. Sure looked like he just dropped the ball. Close one but thought it should of been called a fumble. 

I agree, it was a fumble. Booth ref said the ball would have had to be vertical and it wasn't. To my eyes it was virtually so and should have been a fumble.

[BlazinBill]

Tuck rule? ***** you Tom

 

[BillsFan130]

If it's not a fumble how was it not at least intensional grounding? There was no one even close to where he was "throwing it"

[Sweats]

Whether it was a fumble or not......how did it affect the point spread?

[PromoTheRobot]

8 hours ago, Process said:

It was called a fumble, which makes it even worse. 

 

It's games like this that make me think these games have a producer sitting there telling the sky refs what to call so games are closer and make for exciting TV, not necessarily the right calls.

[HOUSE]

If Buffalo's market size was 3 million it would have been a fumble..

Edited October 15 by HOUSE

[Livinginthepast]

1. Not a pass as the ball never leaves his hand at the full extent of his arm like a normal throw.

2. If it was a pass, it must be a lateral (or backwards) based on the angle of the throw. This means that it has to be a fumble recovered by the Bills.  I thought the initial call was this recovered by the Bills. Yet the "replay assist"? overturned the call. Without ANY compelling evidence to the contrary.

3. Rodgers literally drops the ball out of his hand like people do when they are doing a Mic drop. Clear fumble all day long.

4. The refs pulled out the "You cannot challenge this rule" BS even though it was outside of 2 minutes. Not sure how that was legit?

5. Tuck rule supposedly was changed in 2013 so it cant be that kind of incompleted pass.

6. If it was a fumble from the start, it looked like the Jets player somewhat recovered it but on replay it went through his legs and was not a clear recovery before the Bills player snatched it.

 

Bottom line is the NFL has made of a mess of their own stupid rules yet again.

[Bruffalo]

Certainly seemed like a fumble to me. It's baffling to me that it gets overturned from a sky judge without any real clear and apparent evidence that the call on the field was wrong. If it wasn't called a fumble on the field I wouldn't have expected it to be overturned, but it didn't seem like there was much to say the call on the field was in any way wrong. 

 

I don't buy into the whole "NFL is rigged" theory, but this kind of stuff makes you really think about some tomfoolery going on there. 

[colin]

7 hours ago, co_springs_billsfan said:

And apparently no intentional grounding on those types of plays either.  Quite the loophole!

Ya, some of the incomplete pass while getting hit and intention grounding stuff overlaps.

 

Imo, to be an incomplet forward pass in a fumble type situation, the inus should be on showing it was a forward pass, so we'd have to have a couple elements of a pass, body rotation, arm forward, etc.

 

Call it a fumble and then look to see if there are the several elements.

[NewEra]

Fumble all day.  Figured there was no way we’d get that call.  
 

the referee explaining why we couldn’t challenge was epic.  He did a solid solid spitting it out 

[colin]

7 minutes ago, Livinginthepast said:

1. Not a pass as the ball never leaves his hand at the full extent of his arm like a normal throw.

2. If it was a pass, it must be a lateral (or backwards) based on the angle of the throw. This means that it has to be a fumble recovered by the Bills.  I thought the initial call was this recovered by the Bills. Yet the "replay assist"? overturned the call. Without ANY compelling evidence to the contrary.

3. Rodgers literally drops the ball out of his hand like people do when they are doing a Mic drop. Clear fumble all day long.

4. The refs pulled out the "You cannot challenge this rule" BS even though it was outside of 2 minutes. Not sure how that was legit?

5. Tuck rule supposedly was changed in 2013 so it cant be that kind of incompleted pass.

6. If it was a fumble from the start, it looked like the Jets player somewhat recovered it but on replay it went through his legs and was not a clear recovery before the Bills player snatched it.

 

Bottom line is the NFL has made of a mess of their own stupid rules yet again.

 

 

That is a good point.

 

On the broadcast they said the ball has to be totally vertical to be a tuck, and it came out just prior to that.  I think past the apex (maybe say just above shoulder level) it should count as a tuck/fumble.

[North Buffalo]

21 minutes ago, HOUSE said:

If Buffalo's market size was 3 million it would have been a fumble..

It is just we are displaced all over the country.

[djp14150]

8 hours ago, Riverboat Ritchie said:

Not sure I completely understood the Rogers incomplete/fumble call. Sure looked like he just dropped the ball. Close one but thought it should of been called a fumble. 

thr issue was….was he attempting to throw. If he was about to recoil and bring it in then tuck rule applies snd it is a fumble.

 

his arm was going forward when it was hit. If he lost the ball thrn it was an incomplete pass. He lost the ball right at the boundary of being a throw vs a drop vs a pull in/ tuck

7 hours ago, co_springs_billsfan said:

And apparently no intentional grounding on those types of plays either.  Quite the loophole!

it should never be intentional grounding if you throw and you are hit at the same time just like if arm is hit while throwing.

 

I also have issue on intentional grounding on timing  plays of cut in/ cut out mis communication with 

[SUNTANBILLS FAN]

Worst case a lateral since the ball went backwards…..