[Vague Title] Was it Fumble

[Matt_In_NH]

Close but I would say no, they got that one right.  

[JP51]

It was a fumble or it is a bad rule and needs to be changed. If it is the rule it makes no sense to have the ball going downward and still in the hand of the QB and not being a fumble. Its like taking a full swing of the bat and calling for a check swing cause you didnt mean too... Bad call or bad rule.

[Low Positive]

So, if you're getting sacked, just throw the ball straight down?

[GASabresIUFan]

9 hours ago, RichRiderBills said:

Btw Aikman and Buck were such homers to the bad night of calls. Maybe one time on the BS AJ roughing did Troy speak out. 

Even Rodgers admitted it was a BS call.

[bigK14094]

My one son called it, the NFL looked like pro wrestling last night  The other son turned the game off after the Epenesa non sack.

[YattaOkasan]

47 minutes ago, djp14150 said:

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

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 

Players routinely get intentional grounding while being hit and throwing.  I think youre trying to say that if youre arm gets hit then you should get some grace cause obviously that complicates getting it to an intended receiver (I agree).  Where I think this should have been intentional grounding, if not a fumble, is his arm was not hit until the very end.  If thats truly his release point, which they are saying cause its a pass, then he wasnt throwing to a player.  there is probably language in the rule about contact affecting the throw but Josh has def gotten the short end of that stick many a time.  Also would expect contact affecting the play to sorta launch the ball up if he was gonna throw.  Sorta weird for getting hit back on the top of your body to cause you to spike it (legs sure but chest would push you back and up) so again either fumble cause wasnt throwing or int grounding cause he was trying to throw it to noone to save a sack.

[SoCal Deek]

it was most definitely a fumble. You have to go to intent....and Rodgers was quite CLEARLY trying not to throw that ball. He was trying to hold onto it!

[RyanC883]

10 hours ago, RichRiderBills said:

Btw Aikman and Buck were such homers to the bad night of calls. Maybe one time on the BS AJ roughing did Troy speak out. 

 

those two changed their opinion on that call about 4 times.  was unreal 

10 hours ago, Simon said:

 

One of those weird situations where neither call is "wrong". 🤷‍♂️

 

 

I kind of thought that was the only one that was sort of legit.

He tried to drive that throwing shoulder right into the turf, and I don't blame him.

 

I did too but on a replay they showed later, it looked like it went about 8" forward.

 

this might be true, which makes it more insane, because if neither call is wrong (50/50), the call on the field stands.  So the ultimate/replay call was wrong.  

[BarleyNY]

11 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 have been called a fumble. 

I believe it was because his arm was still moving forward when the ball came out. But then shouldn't it have been intentional grounding? Or was there an eligible player near him?

[RichRiderBills]

2 hours ago, BarleyNY said:

I believe it was because his arm was still moving forward when the ball came out. But then shouldn't it have been intentional grounding? Or was there an eligible player near him?

 

The motion has clearly passed the plane of a viable throw. It has begun to go down into a tuck, at which point it was jarred loose. 

[What a Tuel]

14 hours ago, RichRiderBills said:

Btw Aikman and Buck were such homers to the bad night of calls. Maybe one time on the BS AJ roughing did Troy speak out. 

 

Also the "uncatchable" ball that was "6 yards out of bounds" on the PI call for us. Like no, that ball was not 6 yards out of bounds if it hit the boundary Joe.

 

On topic, it was clearly a fumble, I don't see how people are so adamant that his arm was going forward? He would've released it at the point of the extension if he actually planned to throw it, instead he pulled it back and held on. Clear fumble.

 

Also didn't like our OPI call on Knox I think it was. Kelce does that every damn play and it infuriates me bc he never gets called.

[BarleyNY]

35 minutes ago, RichRiderBills said:

 

The motion has clearly passed the plane of a viable throw. It has begun to go down into a tuck, at which point it was jarred loose. 

 

I am mot aware of rules regarding the plane of the passer’s arm, only that forward motion of the passer’s arm is all that is needed to qualify a pass rather than a fumble. 

[Rocbillsfan1]

It was a fumble 

[Orlando Buffalo]

The frustrating part is that it was called a fumble, or at least I think it was because of how bad those officials were I am not positive, and therefore it should have stood. 

[Cheektowaga Chad]

Per the rule book it's not a fumble 

 

To me common sense says that's a fumble

 

He literally went through the pump fake with possession and was bringing it back in with control then the ball popped out, which again to me is a fumble 

[RichRiderBills]

2 hours ago, BarleyNY said:

 

I am mot aware of rules regarding the plane of the passer’s arm, only that forward motion of the passer’s arm is all that is needed to qualify a pass rather than a fumble. 

 

They blew off a real explanation last night. Seratore said " unless they think it was a tuck" then it would be a fumble. Aikman said something like yeah that's what I was thinking. And they mostly dropped it. 

45 minutes ago, Cheektowaga Chad said:

Per the rule book it's not a fumble 

 

To me common sense says that's a fumble

 

He literally went through the pump fake with possession and was bringing it back in with control then the ball popped out, which again to me is a fumble 

 

I think your wrong. Plz cite. They just were insisting his arm was moving fwd w ball w intent to pass. If it fumbles during tuck its fumble.

[coloradobillsfan]

9 hours ago, NewEra said:

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

Not being able to challenge the sky ref's call is the most Big Brother thing I've seen in the NFL

[LABILLBACKER]

17 hours ago, Process said:

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

They made the correct initial call. The arm came to a complete stop. He could no longer grip it with his elbow on the defenders helmet. No different than the tuck rule which was changed. The booth guys upstairs just made the wrong call.

[Maine-iac]

If they call it a pass, and it's a backward pass, does it matter if it's incomplete?  Isn't a backwards pass, complete or otherwise, a live ball? 

[BobbyC81]

17 hours ago, JohnNord said:

I don’t understand how it wasn’t a fumble.  It’s one of those NFL plays where 10/10 logical football fans would call that a fumble but for whatever reason the officials think otherwise.

 

Another example of overcomplicated rules that make no sense  

It looked like deja vu of the infamous Brady non-fumble.   I didn’t like that rule then and don’t like this call.  He was not in the passing motion, he was bringing it back so it’s a fumble.

 

 

 

 

 

8 hours ago, Low Positive said:

So, if you're getting sacked, just throw the ball straight down?

Isn’t that what Brady frequently did?

Edited October 15 by BobbyC81
Correction for poor multi response structure