jrry32 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 After the game, I thought back to Todd Gurley's fumble in the first quarter. Thomas knocked it out of his hand as he was reaching for the pylon. The ball hit the pylon and was ruled a touchback. It was a bang-bang play whether Gurley was out of bounds with possession or the ball started to come out before his foot was out. However, after the game, I remembered the rule that if the ball is touched by a player out of bounds, it is dead at that spot. Due to that, Gurley having possession is irrelevant. The only question is if he's out of bounds and touching the football. It seems somebody else had the same thought: Here's the play: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000858488/Thomas-makes-nifty-play-to-turn-would-be-Gurley-TD-into-fumble Is that a correct interpretation of the rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Hm. Maybe. I don't see an angle that clearly show he's touching it simultaneously with it being out of bounds. It's very very close. But the best angles don't give you a shot that shows whether or not there's a gap between his hand in the ball when his foot hits out of bounds. You can see his hand behind the ball in the sideline angle, but that doesn't show you if it's touching or not. It's possible that this is the case, but I'm not sure I see an angle to make it clear enough to make that ruling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wackywabbit Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 the rule is the problem, not the call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted October 9, 2017 Author Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 minute ago, Jakuvious said: Hm. Maybe. I don't see an angle that clearly show he's touching it simultaneously with it being out of bounds. It's very very close. But the best angles don't give you a shot that shows whether or not there's a gap between his hand in the ball when his foot hits out of bounds. You can see his hand behind the ball in the sideline angle, but that doesn't show you if it's touching or not. It's possible that this is the case, but I'm not sure I see an angle to make it clear enough to make that ruling. The play on the field was a TD, though. Obviously, it wasn't a TD. But if you can't clearly state it's one way or the other, I'm not sure why the tie goes the defense there. Frankly, I think if you slow it down, you can see his hand still touching the ball after his foot hits. Let me see if I can get a good picture. It doesn't change anything, but you'd expect the League Office to advise the ref of that rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 minute ago, jrry32 said: The play on the field was a TD, though. Obviously, it wasn't a TD. But if you can't clearly state it's one way or the other, I'm not sure why the tie goes the defense there. Frankly, I think if you slow it down, you can see his hand still touching the ball after his foot hits. Let me see if I can get a good picture. It doesn't change anything, but you'd expect the League Office to advise the ref of that rule. Well, you can't rule it as stands when it's clearly not that. I get where you're coming from that it isn't clear of one of two other options, but it's clear it wasn't a TD, so calling it that because you're not sure what else to call it just doesn't seem right either. I see it this way. You can tell for sure he fumbled before going out of bounds or into the end zone. You can tell for sure that the ball was fumbled into the pylon. You cannot tell for sure whether or not he touched it with his foot out of bounds. So you rule based on what you can say for sure, which is no touchdown, ball fumbled, into the pylon, touchback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted October 9, 2017 Author Share Posted October 9, 2017 Just now, Jakuvious said: Well, you can't rule it as stands when it's clearly not that. I get where you're coming from that it isn't clear of one of two other options, but it's clear it wasn't a TD, so calling it that because you're not sure what else to call it just doesn't seem right either. I see it this way. You can tell for sure he fumbled before going out of bounds or into the end zone. You can tell for sure that the ball was fumbled into the pylon. You cannot tell for sure whether or not he touched it with his foot out of bounds. So you rule based on what you can say for sure, which is no touchdown, ball fumbled, into the pylon, touchback. Here we are, his foot is clearly down, and the ball is still clearly touching his hand. That should be a dead ball at the 1. Like I said, you can't rule it a TD, but it doesn't make sense to say that it wasn't clear, so we're giving it to the defense. Since the ruling on the field is wrong, you gotta determine what the right call here is. If he's touching the ball after he steps out (and he is), the play is dead at that spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 If he lost control, then the refs got it completely correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Ramster Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 minute ago, Danger said: If he lost control, then the refs got it completely correct. He's touching the ball out of bounce at the 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 2 minutes ago, El ramster said: He's touching the ball out of bounce at the 1. By my view, him touching it or not touching it versus when his foot touched OOB was too close to call. So I really can't say. Hence why I said, If he lost control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Ramster Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 minute ago, Danger said: By my view, him touching it or not touching it versus when his foot touched OOB was too close to call. So I really can't say. Hence why I said, If he lost control. Reported Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 2 minutes ago, El ramster said: Reported y u mad tho? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted October 9, 2017 Author Share Posted October 9, 2017 29 minutes ago, Danger said: By my view, him touching it or not touching it versus when his foot touched OOB was too close to call. So I really can't say. Hence why I said, If he lost control. They didn't call it a fumble on the field. Thus, you can't really fall back on the too close to call. Hell, there's a picture that shows him touching it with the foot down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 It is impossible to determine from that video IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted October 9, 2017 Author Share Posted October 9, 2017 6 minutes ago, incognito_man said: It is impossible to determine from that video IMO. Check the angle from 2:21 to 2:24. I even took a photo of it. You can see the foot down out of bounds with the ball still touching his fingers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamRod Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 2 hours ago, wackywabbit said: the rule is the problem, not the call I don't get why people have a problem with the rule. You should have possession of the ball as you cross the goal line. If you lose the ball before and it goes out of the end zone, that's a touchback. It's unfortunate when it happens and can shift a game, like here, but I think the rule makes sense. In the case here, it's close whether he was out of bounds before losing the ball. I wish it would've gone the other way, but can't fault the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.