silvermike Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 The QB's intent doesn't matter - which is stupid, but it's the rule. Here's the language: ^ NFL Rule 3, Section 22, Article 2, Note 2: "When a Team A player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his hand 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." It's just flatly stated that it's still an incomplete pass even if he's tucking the ball. When you complete the tuck, then you can fumble again. But the rule makes no sense, and I don't know why the NFL has kept it for 10 years when every application is rejected by fans, coaches, and players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuncha Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 And here's the issue- rules need to begin with "the ball was..." The rule you want begins with "the qb wanted to...." No. You look at it and see: Did the ball come out during the pump? - INC pass Did the QB control the ball all the way through the pump and BRING THE BALL back to his BODY? - If the ball comes out after that its a fumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ofiba Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 And here's the issue- rules need to begin with "the ball was..." The rule you want begins with "the qb wanted to...." It's not a perfect rule but a heck of a lot better than judging intent. The ref still has to judge whether or not the QB completed the tuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuncha Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 The ref still has to judge whether or not the QB completed the tuck. If you are still HOLDING the ball after the throwing motion how can you call that a PASS ATTEMPT??????????????????? Think about it. The ball never left his hand until it was PUNCHED out by a defender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 The ref still has to judge whether or not the QB completed the tuck. Right - what the ball is doing, not what the qb is thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob in STL Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Right - what the ball is doing, not what the qb is thinking. ^^^ Glad someone understands it. Given your explanation you would think that this tuck rule is called almost every game. How about" "The Bob Rule" = if you drop the ball its a fumble. Easy, no judgment, no intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underdog Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 I'm really curious as to how many times the tuck rule has been enforced in the history of the NFL. I believe it's only been used against the Raiders in 2002 and the Bills in 2011. Can anyone confirm this information? I vaguely recall NFL Network episode focusing on the 2002 tuck rule travesty. I think it was said that the tuck rule has been in the rule book FOR AGES but was never enforced until that 02 Raiders -Pats playoff game. This of course left some Raiders & fans to wonder if the NFL was getting revenge for Al Davis's successful lawsuit against the NFL. If it was, I almost admire their patience in waiting two decades for just the right moment...now that's cold. It's bad enough that the rule is ridiculous but when it's so seldom enforced it gets too easy for the conspiracy minded to let their imaginations run wild. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that the Raiders and Bills have been the only ones (that I know of) persecuted by this rule while neither franchise is a big favourite with the majority of NFL owners. Wait a minute...hmmmn. We are through the looking glass. Anyway, off I go to roam the streets wearing my trusty tin foil hat as I search through trash cans for bits of string pausing only to scream revolutionary slogans and laugh hysterically. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 ^^^ Glad someone understands it. Given your explanation you would think that this tuck rule is called almost every game. How about" "The Bob Rule" = if you drop the ball its a fumble. Easy, no judgment, no intent. Is a spike or screen in the dirt a fumble? I think we are closer to the same page in theory but this post is a little bit of devils advocate. The starting point though really needs to be with action not intent which I think we agree on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappy Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) They need to keep the NY market tuned in all night for ratings sake, so here comes the tuck rule. If they leave it, then the Ravens will win outright. UpDate: Bet everything on the Ravens. Edited October 3, 2011 by Scrappy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b stein 22 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 well you are wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappy Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 well you are wrong Ravens win the game for sure, that's the only reason they don't call the tuck rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) I know everyone here loves to hate on Mike Schopp but I love him for stuff like this - he's not afraid to call out the shield. The league is so full of obscure/convoluted technicalities that it's real easy to leave itself 'outs' and claim that any bad call was correct. They can just selectively enforce this tuck rule once every couple years and every announcer and analyst just goes along with it. But not once has anyone ever complained the other 17 times it wasn't enforced. Seriously, have you ever heard anyone say "ya know I don't think that fumble shoulda counted - tuck rule"? Of course not. Phil Simms was in the booth for the original tuck game and he had never heard of it after playing 19 years in the league; but now he just pretends like it was the right call because that's what announcers do. Same thing with this Giants-Cardinals game that just happened. It's such crap, but everyone always has to pretend these weak calls are ok because the shield is bullet-proof. Edited October 3, 2011 by BuffOrange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 I know everyone here loves to hate on Mike Schopp but I love him for stuff like this - he's not afraid to call out the shield. The league is so full of obscure/convoluted technicalities that it's real easy to leave itself 'outs' and claim that any bad call was correct. They can just selectively enforce this tuck rule once every couple years and every announcer and analyst just goes along with it. But not once has anyone ever complained the other 17 times it wasn't enforced. Seriously, have you ever heard anyone say "ya know I don't think that fumble shoulda counted - tuck rule"? Of course not. Phil Simms was in the booth for the original tuck game and he had never heard of it after playing 19 years in the league; but now he just pretends like it was the right call because that's what announcers do. Same thing with this Giants-Cardinals game that just happened. It's such crap, but everyone always has to pretend these weak calls are ok because the shield is bullet-proof. 1) its called more often than you think. 2) Donovan mcnabb didn't think you could tie. 3) refs mess up. It's a fast game with each official having to make dozens of decisions on any given play. All reactionary with little if any warning, at game speed, from odd angles. They do a damn good job. Can't get them all right though. 4) it's a rule book meant to govern literally an endless amount of situations. No easy feat. Not every possible situation is perfectly accounted for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Repulsif Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) Who cares anyway ? For Buffalo an ennemy QB who still has the ball in hands after the pump is not called a fumble. For Baltimore the tuck rule does not apply, even in a very more questionable one. Go figure Edited October 3, 2011 by Repulsif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilsner Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) Tuck rule needs to go. It's a rule for sissies. It's just not well thought out. Edited October 3, 2011 by Pilsner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) 1) its called more often than you think. 2) Donovan mcnabb didn't think you could tie. 3) refs mess up. It's a fast game with each official having to make dozens of decisions on any given play. All reactionary with little if any warning, at game speed, from odd angles. They do a damn good job. Can't get them all right though. 4) it's a rule book meant to govern literally an endless amount of situations. No easy feat. Not every possible situation is perfectly accounted for. How McNabb wasn't familiar with common knowledge I'm not sure, but it's not that improbable that he had never been in an almost-tie game before. Simms on the other hand, I would think have experienced a play applicable to the rule once in his long career if it was "called more than I think". And the game isn't that fast in slow-motion. Edited October 3, 2011 by BuffOrange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 How McNabb wasn't familiar with common knowledge I'm not sure, but it's not that improbable that he had never been in an almost-tie game before. Simms on the other hand, I would think have experienced a play applicable to the rule once in his long career if it was "called more than I think". And the game isn't that fast in slow-motion. I'll point you to last years playoffs. Matt cassel, 3rd quarter.... Check it out for another very recent example. It's not that rare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob in STL Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Is a spike or screen in the dirt a fumble? I think we are closer to the same page in theory but this post is a little bit of devils advocate. The starting point though really needs to be with action not intent which I think we agree on A spike is an incomplete forward pass, no fumble. A dropped screen pass is a fumble if the pass is not ruled forward. A tuck is not a fumble when you are Tom Bardy in the AFC Championship and today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 A spike is an incomplete forward pass, no fumble. A dropped screen pass is a fumble if the pass is not ruled forward. A tuck is not a fumble when you are Tom Bardy in the AFC Championship and today. Or in the post above yours, or a number of others.... My question was how to write the rule, not what they should be, just by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r00tabaga Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) Until they call a fumble and you start crying that fitz was just pump faking. It takes a judgement call away from the ref. Any place the ref gets to make the judgebent call gets people complaining even more. Can't win. I get the rule. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. You couldn't be any more wrong No Saint. That was a terrible case you just made. Nobody liked the tuck rule........except Bill and Jan. Edited October 3, 2011 by r00tabaga Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts