Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 86

Thread: Rule Change

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    West Fargo
    Posts
    8,206

    Default Re: Rule Change

    I would like to see that play in slow motion.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    254

    Default Re: Rule Change

    Quote Originally Posted by Twentysix View Post
    If this exact same thing happened the other way around everyone would be praising the rule. Just man up and take it.

    Heres one for Indy though. The bs pass interference call, I had thought def pass int was a 15 yd penalty or 1/2 the distance to the goal if inside the 15.

    When it was called the line of scrimmage was at the 9 yd line(it was 2nd and 9(goal))and they spotted the ball on the 2..
    I think if the interference happens in the end zone when the LOS is inside the 15 yardline, the ball is places at the 2 by rule.

    ...or something like that.
    "We did the impossible and that makes us mighty." - Captain Malcolm Reynolds

  3. #23
    stevdock is offline Senior Member Gets their mail at the West Parking Lot
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    4,061

    Default Re: Rule Change

    Quote Originally Posted by EmeraldCityBison View Post
    I think if the interference happens in the end zone when the LOS is inside the 15 yardline, the ball is places at the 2 by rule.

    ...or something like that.
    I don't understand why this isn't half the distance like everything else though??

    Also maybe this has always been the case but when did the holding rule change: if it's behind the line of scrimmage it's ten yards from the line of scrimmage, I thought it was always 10 yards from the spot of the foul?? If that's the case then you should be able to hold a defender when the QB is in the endzone and it should be half the distance instead of a safety.

  4. #24
    IndyBison's Avatar
    IndyBison is offline Senior Member Gets their mail at the West Parking Lot
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,633

    Default Re: Rule Change

    Quote Originally Posted by Twentysix View Post
    If this exact same thing happened the other way around everyone would be praising the rule. Just man up and take it.

    Heres one for Indy though. The bs pass interference call, I had thought def pass int was a 15 yd penalty or 1/2 the distance to the goal if inside the 15.

    When it was called the line of scrimmage was at the 9 yd line(it was 2nd and 9(goal))and they spotted the ball on the 2..
    DPI penalty enforcement is an exception to standard penalty enforcement. It's a 15-yard penalty from the previous spot if the foul occurs 15 yards or more from the previous spot. If the foul occurs less than 15 yards from the previous spot, then the ball is placed at the spot of the foul. Half-the-distance enforcement does not apply but the penalty can not place the ball any closer than the 2 so any time the ball is snapped at the 17 or in and the penalty occurs inside the 2 or the end zone, the ball is placed at the 2. The one exception to this is on a try. Then it is half the distance. Got all that straight? They got it right (including the foul). This enforcement is very different than both high school and NFL which probably confuses a lot of non-officials.

    Quote Originally Posted by stevdock View Post
    I don't understand why this isn't half the distance like everything else though??

    Also maybe this has always been the case but when did the holding rule change: if it's behind the line of scrimmage it's ten yards from the line of scrimmage, I thought it was always 10 yards from the spot of the foul?? If that's the case then you should be able to hold a defender when the QB is in the endzone and it should be half the distance instead of a safety.
    Most fouls by the offense committed behind the line of scrimmage are enforced from the previous spot. The one exception to that is a foul by the offense in the end zone. That does result in a safety. As with the fumble forward out of bounds into the end zone, the reason it's different is that goal line is the most important line on the field. It has an impact on several different rules.

    Hope that helps.

  5. #25
    99Bison's Avatar
    99Bison is offline Senior Member Gets their mail at the West Parking Lot
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    On the water
    Posts
    4,113

    Default Re: Rule Change

    Quote Originally Posted by Bison06 View Post
    Please explain why you think someone fumbling the ball on one part of the field vs. another part of the field should have a completely different result.

    For the defense to take possession of the ball in any other area of the playing field they have to earn it by gaining possession. Why in this area of the field when the offense is about to score, should the result be any different than other areas of the field. The defense hasn't done anything to earn possession of the ball and there needs to be research done into coming up with a new rule for this special situation.
    exactly...

  6. #26
    IndyBison's Avatar
    IndyBison is offline Senior Member Gets their mail at the West Parking Lot
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,633

    Default Re: Rule Change

    Quote Originally Posted by Bison06 View Post
    Please explain why you think someone fumbling the ball on one part of the field vs. another part of the field should have a completely different result.

    For the defense to take possession of the ball in any other area of the playing field they have to earn it by gaining possession. Why in this area of the field when the offense is about to score, should the result be any different than other areas of the field. The defense hasn't done anything to earn possession of the ball and there needs to be research done into coming up with a new rule for this special situation.
    Because there are several rules that treat actions in the end zone differently than on the field of play. Penalty enforcements are different if the foul occurs in the end zone or while the ball was in the end zone. Force (what caused the ball to go into the end zone) is key element on balls into the end zone. The goal line is the most important line on the field.

    As for the play itself I haven't seen it yet. I got to watch the replay on FCS last night but they cut out the first 5 minutes of the third quarter for some reason. Based on the comments here the rule was applied correctly though.

    If the rule were ever to be changed, I doubt they would give the ball to the offense at the 1 or 10 yards behind the fumble or the 20. There is no precedent for something like that in any other rules. My guess is they would spot the ball at the spot of the fumble like other forward fumbles out of bounds. I have never heard any rumblings suggesting a rule change like that. This is a pretty standard, long-time rule that is easy to process. That doesn't mean someone can't propose a change though.

    What if the Bison hadn't recovered the fumble for a TD in the third quarter and the ball went out of the end zone? Should the Bison be awarded a safety? They didn't do anything to earn possession of the ball in the end zone. Should the offense be given the ball where they fumbled or at the 20 (touchback)?

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    963

    Default Re: Rule Change

    Quote Originally Posted by IndyBison View Post
    Because there are several rules that treat actions in the end zone differently than on the field of play. Penalty enforcements are different if the foul occurs in the end zone or while the ball was in the end zone. Force (what caused the ball to go into the end zone) is key element on balls into the end zone. The goal line is the most important line on the field.

    As for the play itself I haven't seen it yet. I got to watch the replay on FCS last night but they cut out the first 5 minutes of the third quarter for some reason. Based on the comments here the rule was applied correctly though.

    If the rule were ever to be changed, I doubt they would give the ball to the offense at the 1 or 10 yards behind the fumble or the 20. There is no precedent for something like that in any other rules. My guess is they would spot the ball at the spot of the fumble like other forward fumbles out of bounds. I have never heard any rumblings suggesting a rule change like that. This is a pretty standard, long-time rule that is easy to process. That doesn't mean someone can't propose a change though.

    What if the Bison hadn't recovered the fumble for a TD in the third quarter and the ball went out of the end zone? Should the Bison be awarded a safety? They didn't do anything to earn possession of the ball in the end zone. Should the offense be given the ball where they fumbled or at the 20 (touchback)?
    If the ball had been kicked around and never picked up by our defense and it gets kicked out of the back of the endzone, it should be just as if it went out of bounds anywhere else on the field. Nobody retained possession of the ball so it goes back to the last team who had possession of the ball. Where to spot it would be a different discussion I suppose.

    I realize the endzone is a special place on the field, so having special set of rules for this area is competely understood. This one rule though, seems to reward a team for doing nothing.

    Let's say a guy is running down the field about to score a touchdown, nobody is within 20 yards of him and he fumbles it straight through the endzone and out the back. It would be called a touchback and the opposing team would get the ball at the 20 yard line. I could be wrong, but I can't think of another instance in the game of football that a team is rewarded so heavily for an event that they did nothing to cause. It seems that the penalty doesn't fit the crime and it is a matter of bad fortune that turns the game completely around in most instances.

    In this specific scenario, I would be for a penalty thrown on the offense, similar to kicking the ball out of bounds on the kickoff. Penalize the team 10-15 yards, but why take possession away from them when the defense didn't earn the ball by recovering it?

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    8,770

    Default Re: Rule Change

    I believe a major reason for awarding the ball to the defense in this situation is to balance out the risk/reward. Since the Offense could conceivably recover in the end zone and be awarded 6 points for not actually carrying it across the goal line, it is counterbalanced by the threat of losing possession EVEN IF IT IS NOT RECOVERED BY EITHER TEAM. That's actually a big disincentive to keep teams from fumbling intentionally.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Borup
    Posts
    21,318

    Default Re: Rule Change

    Quote Originally Posted by Bison06 View Post
    If the ball had been kicked around and never picked up by our defense and it gets kicked out of the back of the endzone, it should be just as if it went out of bounds anywhere else on the field. Nobody retained possession of the ball so it goes back to the last team who had possession of the ball. Where to spot it would be a different discussion I suppose.

    I realize the endzone is a special place on the field, so having special set of rules for this area is competely understood. This one rule though, seems to reward a team for doing nothing.

    Let's say a guy is running down the field about to score a touchdown, nobody is within 20 yards of him and he fumbles it straight through the endzone and out the back. It would be called a touchback and the opposing team would get the ball at the 20 yard line. I could be wrong, but I can't think of another instance in the game of football that a team is rewarded so heavily for an event that they did nothing to cause. It seems that the penalty doesn't fit the crime and it is a matter of bad fortune that turns the game completely around in most instances.

    In this specific scenario, I would be for a penalty thrown on the offense, similar to kicking the ball out of bounds on the kickoff. Penalize the team 10-15 yards, but why take possession away from them when the defense didn't earn the ball by recovering it?
    Two things on the bolded portions above, well, maybe more than two. First, I would venture a guess that the VAST majority of fumbles are caused by a defensive play, so that takes the VAST majority of the scenarious. Next, if an offensive player fumbles on his own accord and the ball goes out of the endzone (out of "field of play"), shouldnt his team be "penalized" for such a self-imposed blunder. Why reward a fumble/mistake? Also, leaving to the officials to decide whether fumble was caused by the defense of just was just a blunder by the ball carrier would really put things into the gray area.

    Lastly, that was a hell of an effort by Holloway!!!
    Bisonville: Making football coaches out of arm-chair-QB's and jock sniffers for years!
    Today's CAS GASF = ZERO
    RELUCTANT MEMBER of the TOHBTC

    And, don’t believe everything you think—jussayin’.

    Liberals of BV need not respond to my posts. I don’t need to get any more dumb.


  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    18,525

    Default Re: Rule Change

    Really surprised no one is talking about this:

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...aign=editorial

    I think this was inevitable after the 25 yard line touchback did not have the desired effect of lowing the number of returns due to coaches moving to pin teams with high kickoffs to corners. It will make for interesting decision making for the returner having the option of fair catching and going to the 25 yl.

    Discuss.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •