Jump to content
Jambands.ca

That was a fumble, I dont care what anyone says


Booche
 Share

Recommended Posts

NFL Rule 3, Section 21, Article 2

Note 2: When a Team A player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.

Note 3: If the player loses possession of the ball while attempting to recock his arm, it is a fumble.

When blitzing cornerback Charles Woodson blindsided Brady, karate-chopping the ball to the ground, and linebacker Greg Biekert recovered at the Raiders' 47-yard-line with 1:43 left, the game appeared to be over -- with the Raiders ahead 13-10. But the Patriots had one last chance thanks to instant replay and, after reviewing the play in which Brady appeared to pull the ball down and then fumble, Coleman inexplicably ruled it an incomplete pass.

Well, what about it? Was it a fumble or an incomplete pass?

"Uh...," Brady said when questioned. "You know, he hit me. I wasn't sure. Yeah, I was throwing the ball. How do you like that? Damn right. Damn right."

A blown call if you ask me!

I really shouldnt have looked this up, I am going to be depressed AND angry for a loooooooong time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry, but the Note 2 at the top doesnt' make sense to me andré

the first half of the note makes it look like any movement forward begins the pass - therefore, it would be incomplete

but the second half of the note says it's defining a fumble... (?)

so if he had begun to throw, it sounds like a blocked pass in a way rather than a fumble -- incomplete... but i guess obviously i'd have to see the play...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically, he had begun to throw and then decided against it..almost like a 'pump fake' (you know about those eh Treyter?)

anyways, after the pump fake, he proceeds to 'tuck' the ball to his chest like he is protecting it (he obviously is NOT in passing mode at all)....this is when the ball popped loose therefore I consider it to be a fumble, having read the rules.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well if the ball is tucked, there's no need to read the rules is there? - so there is definitely a question there even for you - the defenseman didn't pop it out, he karate chopped it down, so obviously it was out away from the body -- it wasn't tucked, It was an incomplete pass, you'll just have to accept it and move on ....

(ok ha ha, i'm totally just fucking with you andré - wish i coulda seen you turning red while reading that)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is precidence for that call though... I can't remember the game but it was on espn... Anyway it was even more obvious that the quarterback was not trying to throw the ball or even to fake a throw, he was simply trying to bring the ball in when about to be hit. But since the ball went from a thowing position into his body it was ruled an incomplete pass... so at least on that level the refs were being consistant..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if only I knew.....

with the soccer (football) talk on this board, I didn't know we had some NFL fans online. This is a good thing

my2sense, the problem wasn't the hit itself (ahem, fumble) but the notion of conclusive evidence that the NFL needs to work on. In this case, there was NONE. All the angles told a vague and interpretive story (trust me, we saw it enough times Sat and Sun) Too bad for Chucky and da Raiders.

While we're on the thread, who's everybody's teams. I'm a Giants fan from the days of yore (LT was the closest thing to a superhero I'd ever seen as a kid) but these days I'll cheer for who's ever playing the greatest show on turf. GO PHILLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A GOOD CALL?

Holy crap!

Yes, the rule is vague, BUT, as far as I see it, the instant replay judge was in NO DAMN POSTION to tell 'weather' or not that ball was 'tucked' or not......it was too much of a judgement call so the ruling should not have been overturned! Brady was NOT throwing the ball and was obviously trying to protect it. Therefore, I PRTOEST cause he PROTECTEDED!

What can the NFL do to fix that rule? This is a tucked ball, this is not? (obviously, they will re-word it better)

What if Tom Brady were Antwoin Smith?

Do you really think they would have overturned it?

I say, GO STEELERS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rule says

any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body

the arm was moving... this is not in question

If the player loses possession of the ball while attempting to recock his arm, it is a fumble.

there was no attempt to recock, he was still on his origional cock... there was no secondary cock.. all this cock talk is making me uncomfortable.... cock sucker

It was a good call...

Bad rule

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...