Fumbling into the end zone

[wazu]

I love how ChiefsPlanet is suddenly in love with this rule.

[Lprechaun]

Originally Posted by wazu

I love how ChiefsPlanet is suddenly in love with this rule.

I've never had a problem with it. If this much [ ] is enough to say the ball crossed the plain of goal line than a rule that rarely comes in to play where an offensive player loses possession of the ball and it rolls forward into and out of the endzone it should penalize the offense.

[old_geezer]

Originally Posted by wazu

I love how ChiefsPlanet is suddenly in love with this rule.

I'm not "in love with the rule", I've just never had a problem with it before and I see no reason to change it suddenly because of one game.

[IowaHawkeyeChief]

Originally Posted by wazu

I love how ChiefsPlanet is suddenly in love with this rule.

I have always been in favor of the rule... always will be. You are defending that area from the offense, if they fumble into your area and it goes out of play, they should lose possession...

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief

I have always been in favor of the rule... always will be. You are defending that area from the offense, if they fumble into your area and it goes out of play, they should lose possession...

I've always thought it was a little weird, but I like this logic. The end zones are special and "owned by the team" as it was mentioned. And preventing players from being reckless with the ball near the pylon/goal line makes sense, too.

The best and really only alternative I could think of would be to make it a 15 yard penalty from the spot of the fumble, but the best solution has always been to not fumble into/out of the end zone.

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by wazu

I love how ChiefsPlanet is suddenly in love with this rule.

Why would anybody be “in love” with a rule?

It’s about understanding the rule and seeing the logic behind it.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by wazu

I love how ChiefsPlanet is suddenly in love with this rule.

It's not that. If one of our jackasses fumble it out of the endzone, I'll be pissed at the jackass, not the rule. (I'm looking at you, Robinson)

[DanT]

Both parts of the rule for fumbling in the end zone make perfect sense to me:

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules...0a%20touchback.

Item 4. Out of Bounds in End Zone. When a fumble goes out of bounds in the end zone, the following shall apply:

1. If a ball is fumbled in the field of play, and goes forward into the opponent’s end zone and over the end line or sideline, a touchback is awarded to the defensive team; or

2. If a ball is fumbled in a team’s own end zone or in the field of play and goes out of bounds in the end zone, it is a safety, if that team provided the impetus that sent the ball into the end zone (See 11-5-1 for exception for momentum). If the impetus was provided by the opponent, it is a touchback.

[A Salt Weapon]

The rule is fine and every team has been on both sides of it. The offense only has to cross the plane as it is, if they lose the ball within fumble range and it goes out it’s a good rule. Now if offense had to maintain possession through the end zone or something along the same lines it could be changed. But with the current rules of the offense only having to cross the plane, leaving the fumble rule as is works.

[tyecopeland]

I'm of the mindset that the sideline should be ruled the same throughout. If a player reaches for a first down and fumbles and the ball goes out of bounds they get the ball where it was fumbled. I think it should be the same at the endzone. Now if the ball goes out the back of the endzone I could see it being a touchback. Because the defense had lost opportunity to recover the ball since there was less field to get to it.

[IowaHawkeyeChief]

Originally Posted by tyecopeland

I'm of the mindset that the sideline should be ruled the same throughout. If a player reaches for a first down and fumbles and the ball goes out of bounds they get the ball where it was fumbled. I think it should be the same at the endzone. Now if the ball goes out the back of the endzone I could see it being a touchback. Because the defense had lost opportunity to recover the ball since there was less field to get to it.

The 100 yards between the endzones is neutral territory, the endzone is being defended as the defender's territory. This logic is very clear why they are treated differently.

[Beef Supreme]

Originally Posted by tyecopeland

I'm of the mindset that the sideline should be ruled the same throughout. If a player reaches for a first down and fumbles and the ball goes out of bounds they get the ball where it was fumbled. I think it should be the same at the endzone. Now if the ball goes out the back of the endzone I could see it being a touchback. Because the defense had lost opportunity to recover the ball since there was less field to get to it.

That's because you're an idiot.

I guess you probably think that if you are backed up in your own endzone and the quarterback takes the snap and fumbles out the side of their own endzone they should get to keep the ball and get it where he fumbled it out of bounds.

[DaFace]

The issue with the idea of changing the rule is that people don't think through how the rule change will change how people APPROACH the game. I really have no interest in making it super easy for guys to constantly dive at the pylon with the ball just barely held in their hand since they know there won't be any consequences if they fumble it.

[RedRaider56]

Originally Posted by DaFace

The issue with the idea of changing the rule is that people don't think through how the rule change will change how people APPROACH the game. I really have no interest in making it super easy for guys to constantly dive at the pylon with the ball just barely held in their hand since they know there won't be any consequences if they fumble it.

Cleveland's coach was asked about this and he basically said, Higgins screwed up. We tell them not to dive and extend the ball just for the specific reason of fumbling the ball through or out of the end zone. He didn't have an issue.