Rule Questions (Tuck/Intentional Grounding)

[co_springs_billsfan]

I've seen this several times in the past few years, but asking about a situation like Dewayne Carter's fumble recovery for a touchdown that was overturned yesterday. 

 

First of all, I thought the tuck rule had been eliminated and it seemed on the replays that the quarterback had decided against throwing the ball and was trying to pull the ball back to his body. Is this not what the tuck rule was and should have resulted in a fumble? 

 

Second part of the question, if the tuck rule does not apply and the officials can go back and call it an incomplete pass, I've never seen them in this situation assess an intentional grounding penalty. It seems to me in these situations where a fumble is turned into an incomplete pass that there is almost never a receiver in the area. Are they not allowed to assess a penalty retroactively? Or is there some other reason why this isn't a penalty?

[eSJayDee]

In this case, the ball went backwards, so it's a lateral, not a pass.  So any tuck rule is not applicable.  You do have a valid point that when they abort a forward throw & it goes straight in the ground near them there likely isn't a receiver in the area & if the throw was not altered by contact w/ a defender, I think it should be grounding but I don't recall it ever being called (though throwing into the ground doesn't occur frequently).  (ie refs aren't supposed to interpret intent, ie like when a receiver runs a wrong route)