When the Offense Fumbles the Ball Out of the Opposing End Zone the Result Should Be....

[26CornerBlitz]

 

Touchback or keep the ball at the spot of the fumble?  The current rule of a touchback seems to be controversial these days with many claiming it's too punitive.  What say you?

Edited December 23, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[BillsSB2020]

There's really only one good reason to keep the rule and that's to prevent players from over-extending knowing there's no repurcussions for fumbling OOB in the EZ. I'd keep it, but I see both sides.

[The Wiz]

Down at the spot of the fumble is my opinion unless it is a flagrant throw of the ball. 

 

I honestly think it's dumb to penalize a player for trying to get a td in a league obsessed with scoring. 

[Augie]

The Bills win. 

[KD in CA]

20 minutes ago, The Wiz said:

Down at the spot of the fumble is my opinion unless it is a flagrant throw of the ball. 

 

Oh great....even more judgement calls by the officials.  That always ends well.

[1st Ammendment NoMas]

I think it would be great for the offense to keep the ball, but it be spotted back at the 10 yd line keeping the same down as if the ball didn't go into the end zone. So if it the fumble occurred on 2nd and goal, it's now 3rd and goal from the 10 instead of the touchback and play continues.  Basically fumbling into the end zone becomes a 10 yd penalty, but no replay of the down. Kind of like intentional grounding.

Edited December 22, 2018 by BillsRdue

[MPT]

Should be treated like a fumble anywhere else on the field. Placed at the spot of the fumble since a fumble can't advance the ball. Currently, it's way too much of a reward to the defense for allowing the other team to get to the goal line and then getting the ball on a fluke.

1 minute ago, BillsRdue said:

I think it would be great for the offense to keep the ball, but it be spot at the 10 yd line keeping the same down as if it didn't go into the end zone, so if it was 2nd and goal and the fumble occurred, its now 3rd and goal from the 10 instead of a touchback. 

 

That would be better. Penalize the team that fumbled, but don't reward the other team.

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, MPT said:

Should be treated like a fumble anywhere else on the field. Placed at the spot of the fumble since a fumble can't advance the ball. Currently, it's way too much of a reward to the defense for allowing the other team to get to the goal line and then getting the ball on a fluke.

 

What about when a team fumbles the ball out of their own end zone?  Is a safety too punitive? 

[MJS]

I like that the defense can use the sideline and back of the end zone as their friend.

[hemma]

Keep it with the offense, but place it at the 25 with loss of down.  

Still in field goal range, but not totally screwed like they are now.

[The Wiz]

32 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

 

Oh great....even more judgement calls by the officials.  That always ends well.

When it comes to a fumble, I think it's easy to tell if someone meant to do it or not. 

 

Unless the rule changes that is.

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

Why would anyone have an issue with this rule? Of all the ridiculous things that get called constantly and drive people crazy, this isn’t even a blip on the radar IMO. Change the asinine overtime rules. Or the way pass interference is called. Coaches challenges are ridiculous. Throwing a silly little red flag and losing them even when you are correct. Stop letting the clock run on penalties that get accepted. At the end of a game when a team is hurrying up and you have an accepted penalty on the defense, they still run the time off the clock. At that moment time is more important then the yards. There are dozens of rules that bother me more then the touchback.

[Stank_Nasty]

55 minutes ago, hemma said:

Keep it with the offense, but place it at the 25 with loss of down.  

Still in field goal range, but not totally screwed like they are now.

This is exactly what a couple of friends and I just discussed Monday night when it happened. 

 

It think ruling it a TO is atrocious. Loss of down. Take it back to the 20. 

 

That’ll never happen. But I think it’s a good option 

[MPT]

1 hour ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

What about when a team fumbles the ball out of their own end zone?  Is a safety too punitive? 

 

I don't think so. Fumbling out of your own end zone prevents two scenarios: getting tackled for a safety anyway, or the other team recovering for a touchdown (meaning the other team would end up with at least two points regardless of the outcome). Fumbling out of your opponents' end zone prevents one scenario: you scoring a touchdown (meaning the other team saves 7 points and should count their lucky stars they get a crack at holding you at the spot of the fumble).

[BillsSB2020]

47 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

Why would anyone have an issue with this rule? Of all the ridiculous things that get called constantly and drive people crazy, this isn’t even a blip on the radar IMO. Change the asinine overtime rules. Or the way pass interference is called. Coaches challenges are ridiculous. Throwing a silly little red flag and losing them even when you are correct. Stop letting the clock run on penalties that get accepted. At the end of a game when a team is hurrying up and you have an accepted penalty on the defense, they still run the time off the clock. At that moment time is more important then the yards. There are dozens of rules that bother me more then the touchback.

I agree with the sentiment, but I'm pretty sure the clock stops on penalties in late game situations even if it would normally run such as a run play. Not 100 percent sure though.

[iinii]

The current rule doesn’t follow the spirit of the law to me. It should be the same as a fumble out of bounds.

[Success]

Let’s get into the mindset of the rules committee:  what outcome best benefits the New England Patriots?

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

27 minutes ago, BillsSB2020 said:

I agree with the sentiment, but I'm pretty sure the clock stops on penalties in late game situations even if it would normally run such as a run play. Not 100 percent sure though.

What I’m saying, let’s say a play is run that takes 8 secs off the clock and they call defensive holding. They don’t put that time back on the clock. So on a penalty you essentially lost the time of a play and often didn’t get enough yards for it to even matter. After the play is over they should put that time back. Why punish the offense?

[NoSaint]

18 minutes ago, iinii said:

The current rule doesn’t follow the spirit of the law to me. It should be the same as a fumble out of bounds.

 

The goal line has all kinds of special rules, and with the biggest rewards come the biggest risks.

[Big Turk]

I'd like to see the offense keep possession but maybe treat it like a penalty and move the ball back to the 10 yard line but count the down. That would be a middle ground where there is a cost for having it happen but not the ultimate cost.

 

But then this begs the question. What do you do when the offense fumble the ball out of their own endzone? If we are  allowing them to keep posession when they fumble it out of opposition endzone, why do they lose possession when it happens at the other end? Whats the difference? If they keep possession on one end they should keep it at the other end...its the same play. 

 

Or maybe if the defense gets 2 points for the ball being fumbled out of the endzone in that direction, should the offense get 2 points if it gets fumbled out the other direction? 

 

In my mind its about consistency. If you change the rule one way where the fumbling team keeps possession then you necessarily need to change it so when it happens the other way the same rule applies.

[Cripple Creek]

Leave it as is. We don't need refs spending 15 minutes trying to determine intent.

[RememberTheRockpile]

1 hour ago, The Wiz said:

When it comes to a fumble, I think it's easy to tell if someone meant to do it or not. 

That is a pretty optimistic view of the officials. 

[BillsSB2020]

32 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

What I’m saying, let’s say a play is run that takes 8 secs off the clock and they call defensive holding. They don’t put that time back on the clock. So on a penalty you essentially lost the time of a play and often didn’t get enough yards for it to even matter. After the play is over they should put that time back. Why punish the offense?

Gotcha. 

[RiotAct]

Death by firing squad

[KD in CA]

2 hours ago, The Wiz said:

When it comes to a fumble, I think it's easy to tell if someone meant to do it or not. 

 

Unless the rule changes that is.

 

You're talking about a league that can't figure out what it means to ***** catch a football.

 

 

[Big Turk]

3 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

What about when a team fumbles the ball out of their own end zone?  Is a safety too punitive? 

 

Thats kind of my point. It can't be one rule at one endzone and another rule at the other endzone in regards to possession.

 

Maybe the offensive team should get 2 points for fumbling it through the endzone but still be forced to kickoff from the 20 on a free kick to the other team...

[dubs]

I think a touchback is too punitive against the offense. Rather, I think the offense should keep the ball but it should be spotted all the way back at their own 1 yard line.  Also think the offense should be forced to have their place kicker play QB the rest of the game and would not be allowed to run the ball, only passes.  Also, the center has to line up in the slot with the punter taking over snapping duties. That seems more fair. 

 

 

Just kidding, I like it the way it is. 

[Buffalo Barbarian]

I started this topic about a month ago. The offense retains the ball, period.

 

This nonsense of the defense cause the fumble so they should get is illogical. Does the defense get the ball when the ball goes out of bounds ? No. Does the defense get the ball if they dont recover it on the field? No. Therefore the defense should not get the ball unless they recover it . Problem solved.

 

who ever came up this ridiculous touch back ruling is an idiot.

[reddogblitz]

I say leave it as is.  Yes, it is harsh.  Respect the football.

[Chandler#81]

6 hours ago, Success said:

Let’s get into the mindset of the rules committee:  what outcome best benefits the New England Patriots?

 

Winner.

/thread.

[H2o]

I like the current rule. It's tough to swallow for the offense, but those are the breaks. 

[26CornerBlitz]

6 hours ago, matter2003 said:

 

Thats kind of my point. It can't be one rule at one endzone and another rule at the other endzone in regards to possession.

 

Maybe the offensive team should get 2 points for fumbling it through the endzone but still be forced to kickoff from the 20 on a free kick to the other team...

 

That's a pretty ridiculous idea IMO.  Why should an offense be rewarded with points for making such a big mistake regarding the lack of ball security on a negative play?

[4merper4mer]

Whenever this happens in any NFL game Alabama should get an automatic berth into FBS playoff.

[CLTbills]

10 hours ago, BillsRdue said:

I think it would be great for the offense to keep the ball, but it be spotted back at the 10 yd line keeping the same down as if the ball didn't go into the end zone. So if it the fumble occurred on 2nd and goal, it's now 3rd and goal from the 10 instead of the touchback and play continues.  Basically fumbling into the end zone becomes a 10 yd penalty, but no replay of the down. Kind of like intentional grounding.

I like this option the best. It removes the chances of a player being careless because there is essentially no repercussion if he fumbles.

[Rochesterfan]

11 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Touchback or keep the ball at the spot of the fumble?  The current rule of a touchback seems to be controversial these days with many claiming it's too punitive.  What say you?

 

 

I like the current rule - fumbles everywhere else through 90% of the game do not move back to the spot.  

 

I think it makes sense to greatly penalize a team for a fumble in the most important area - especially with how the goal line changes other rules for the offense.

9 hours ago, iinii said:

The current rule doesn’t follow the spirit of the law to me. It should be the same as a fumble out of bounds.

 

So the team that fumbled the ball get the ball in the middle of the end Zone?  A fumble out of bounds is marked where it goes out of bounds not where the fumble occurs.

 

If they are going to change the rule near the end zone then the rule needs to be updated across the field with all fumbles being moved back to the spot and not advancement - so for example the Zay Jones Fumble into the end zone recovered by Buffalo for a TD gets moved back to the 3 yard line.

[The Wiz]

7 hours ago, KD in CA said:

 

You're talking about a league that can't figure out what it means to ***** catch a football.

 

 

Right but what does fumbling the ball intentionally gain a player.  I honestly can't think of a scenario where someone would be able to leverage it.  

 

Was it a fumble, yes, they get the ball at the spot of the fumble. 

 

No, they get the ball at the spot he was down by contact. 

 

It's the same outcome either way. 

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, The Wiz said:

Right but what does fumbling the ball intentionally gain a player.  I honestly can't think of a scenario where someone would be able to leverage it.  

 

Was it a fumble, yes, they get the ball at the spot of the fumble. 

 

No, they get the ball at the spot he was down by contact. 

 

It's the same outcome either way. 

 

They would get a do over for a serious mistake which in effect is a reward for not securing the ball. 

[DCOrange]

11 hours ago, BillsRdue said:

I think it would be great for the offense to keep the ball, but it be spotted back at the 10 yd line keeping the same down as if the ball didn't go into the end zone. So if it the fumble occurred on 2nd and goal, it's now 3rd and goal from the 10 instead of the touchback and play continues.  Basically fumbling into the end zone becomes a 10 yd penalty, but no replay of the down. Kind of like intentional grounding.

Something along these lines is the best option IMO. I’ve seen people suggest moving it back to the 20 also and I think that’s fine too. I just don’t think it should automatically be given to the defense. 

[ExiledInIllinois]

11 hours ago, KD in CA said:

 

Oh great....even more judgement calls by the officials.  That always ends well.

+1

[transient]

The current rule is fine. Look at it in the simplest terms; in addition to a punt, turnover, turnover on downs, or field goal, the goal lines demarcate the term of possession.  Cross one and the term ends, whether by scoring a TD (with subsequent attempt at extra point(s)), giving up a safety, or turning over the ball due to carelessness. The game is played between the lines.