Ramius Posted October 17, 2004 Share Posted October 17, 2004 what was the call on that...the ball never went out of bounds, the player was standing OB when he touched the ball while it was still inbounds...i thought that was a penalty, going OB and being the first to touch it...miami should have gotten it on the 3, not the 40... Can someone clarify this for me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ofiba Posted October 17, 2004 Share Posted October 17, 2004 there is a weird rule stating that if the returner first touches the ball when he is out of bounds than the kickoff is ruled out of bounds. seems pretty cheap but thats the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted October 17, 2004 Share Posted October 17, 2004 I commented on this on a different thread -- it's just like the play that New England beat us on when their player was unconscious out of bounds. If you're out of bounds and touch the ball, the ball is considered out of bounds. Lame, but there it is. CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted October 17, 2004 Share Posted October 17, 2004 seems to me that the player is an out of bounds object, therefore if the out of bounds object comes in contact with the ball, then the ball should be out of bounds, wierd. what was the call on that...the ball never went out of bounds, the player was standing OB when he touched the ball while it was still inbounds...i thought that was a penalty, going OB and being the first to touch it...miami should have gotten it on the 3, not the 40... Can someone clarify this for me? 73116[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crows57 Posted October 17, 2004 Share Posted October 17, 2004 what was the call on that...the ball never went out of bounds, the player was standing OB when he touched the ball while it was still inbounds...i thought that was a penalty, going OB and being the first to touch it...miami should have gotten it on the 3, not the 40... Can someone clarify this for me? 73116[/snapback] The same thing happened in the Ravens/Redskin game last week. Odd rule, but apparently correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted October 17, 2004 Share Posted October 17, 2004 The rule SHOULD be that a player who goes out of bounds cannot be the first player to touch the ball, like on EVERY OTHER PLAY in the game. I assume that the rule is different on ST's, but why, I do not know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zow2 Posted October 17, 2004 Share Posted October 17, 2004 Someone did this in a Monday night game a couple weeks ago. It was beautiful. Ball was not going out of bounds but the Kick returner picked it up on the 10 with one of his other legs stretched touching out of bounds. Bingo, ball on the 40. It's a great play when the kick returner knows the rule and it all comes together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted October 17, 2004 Share Posted October 17, 2004 The rule SHOULD be that a player who goes out of bounds cannot be the first player to touch the ball, like on EVERY OTHER PLAY in the game. I assume that the rule is different on ST's, but why, I do not know. 73210[/snapback] I don't think it has anything to do with special teams vs regular play. The "can't be first to touch the ball" is when the player goes out of bopunds and then comes back in. If you're out of bounds, you can touch the ball if you want. CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 there is a weird rule stating that if the returner first touches the ball when he is out of bounds than the kickoff is ruled out of bounds. seems pretty cheap but thats the rule. 73120[/snapback] That rule sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfanone Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 there is a weird rule stating that if the returner first touches the ball when he is out of bounds than the kickoff is ruled out of bounds. seems pretty cheap but thats the rule. 73120[/snapback] That has to be the lamest rule ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LancasterSteve Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 That rule sucks. 73668[/snapback] I agree Be a good question to ask Donahoe. If its such a stupid rule why isn't it changed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfanone Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Give the fin credit, it was a heads up play though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts