Fumble out of the endzone touchback.

[ivotuk]

I Love that rule.

#1, it gets the defense to really go after it near the end zone (defend every blade of grass) and is an EXCITING PLAY!

#2, Players like to reach the ball out near the end zone, and in that instance, ANYTHING can happen! Which makes it much more fun.

#3, I'm sure there was a reason for that rule, they didn't just pull it out of thin air. Maybe players were "fumbling" it in to the end zone as they were getting tackled and having their team mate fall on it for a TD.

The rule that I think is silly, is the one where KJ batted the ball out of then end of the EZ, but didn't get caught for. Why should that be a penalty?
He could have just as easily attempted to grab the ball, lost his grip, had it bounce out of the EZ and gotten a penalty if the Ref thought he did it on purpose? Dumb.

And you can't compare basketball rules to football rules. Football is a collision sport with an oblong ball. And basketball doesn't have a large end zone. There is NO differentiation between the out of bounds line on a basketball court. The sidelines are the same as the end of the court lines. There is no square, marked off area for scoring. BBall has a hoop with a backboard.

 

[BASF]

Isn't this the Holy Roller rule?

 

[Threedee]

I also enjoy when the ball carrier showboats by dropping the ball too soon, resulting in it striking the ground and rolling across the plane of the goal line for a TB.

 

[rcaido]

I also enjoy when the ball carrier showboats by dropping the ball too soon, resulting in it striking the ground and rolling across the plane of the goal line for a TB.

Wilson threw for 5TDs that game, DK robbed him with his 6th from that 65yard bomb.

 

[RiverDog]

Isn't this the Holy Roller rule?

No. The Holy Roller rule was inspired by Raider's tight end Dave Casper helping a forward fumble by QB Kenny Stabler to make it to the end zone where he fell on it for a touchdown with little or no time remaining, giving the Raiders a one-point win.

"In response to the Holy Roller, the league passed new rules in the off-season, restricting fumble advances by the offense. If a player fumbles after the two-minute warning in a half/overtime, or on fourth down at any time during the game, only the fumbling player can recover and advance the ball. If that player's teammate recovers the ball during those situations, it is placed back at the spot of the fumble, unless it was a recovery for a loss, in which case the ball is dead and placed at the point of recovery."

 

[evergreen]

Wilson threw for 5TDs that game, DK robbed him with his 6th from that 65yard bomb.

It seems like that just happened recently where the other team picked it up and ran it back for a td. Maybe it was college, like Utah.

 

[RiverDog]

This rule reared its head in a critical situation last weekend and nearly cost the Chiefs a playoff win.

They need the make the punishment fit the crime. Call it a touchback but let the offense keep the ball on the 20-yard line. That's still one of the harshest consequences in the game, essentially a 20-yard penalty and in most cases, taking away a sure-fire touchdown. The only other situation I can think of with a greater consequence is a DPI that results in a spot foul 50 yards downfield.

 

[flv2]

This rule reared its head in a critical situation last weekend and nearly cost the Chiefs a playoff win.

They need the make the punishment fit the crime. Call it a touchback but let the offense keep the ball on the 20-yard line. That's still one of the harshest consequences in the game, essentially a 20-yard penalty and in most cases, taking away a sure-fire touchdown. The only other situation I can think of with a greater consequence is a DPI that results in a spot foul 50 yards downfield.

That would be better than the current rule but it would still mean fumbling at the goal-line had a 20 yard consequence whilst fumbling at the 1 had 0 consequence. I would rather they were treated the same. Fumbling OOB should be a penalty on the fumbling team regardless of where the ball goes OOB. I'm open to the penalty being 5, 10, or 15 yards.

 

[RiverDog]

That would be better than the current rule but it would still mean fumbling at the goal-line had a 20 yard consequence whilst fumbling at the 1 had 0 consequence. I would rather they were treated the same. Fumbling OOB should be a penalty on the fumbling team regardless of where the ball goes OOB. I'm open to the penalty being 5, 10, or 15 yards.

Agreed.

 

[HawkFreak]

That would be better than the current rule but it would still mean fumbling at the goal-line had a 20 yard consequence whilst fumbling at the 1 had 0 consequence. I would rather they were treated the same. Fumbling OOB should be a penalty on the fumbling team regardless of where the ball goes OOB. I'm open to the penalty being 5, 10, or 15 yards.

I am still trying to decide if I 100% like the rule. I think for now I lean towards liking it as is.
I know some are saying all out of bounds plays should be treated the same but the difference here is that we are talking about the end zone. The end zone is a special place on the field. More special that every other sideline. Why shouldn't it have some special rules?

And so what if it benefits the defense. Every other freaking rule change benefits the offenses.

 

[ivotuk]

I kind of love the rule because of the two times ETIII turned what was almost a Rams rushing TD into a turnover, the Seahawks getting the ball at the 20.

View attachment 60652

View attachment 60651

Yes! Yes! and Yes!

It's a strategy rule that a good defensive coach will teach his players about. I LOVE this rule, because it helped us when important games. The EXCITEMENT generated from those plays will never be forgotten!

 

[HawkFreak]

Imagine if every fumble out of bounds resulted in a change in possession. Throwing to the sidelines would be pretty intense.

But this isn't a simple fumble directly out of bounds.
It's a fumble through the end zone and then out of bounds.
Those things aren't the same.