shrader Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 So it's an incomplete pass, great. But didn't that ball go backwards yesterday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 So it's an incomplete pass, great. But didn't that ball go backwards yesterday? Yes, but that is part of the "rule". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lets_go_bills Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 In this case, I am not questioning the call, I am questioning the rule. The rule is just vague enough to be applied to several situations, so trying to argue that it was not covered by the "Tuck Rule" is a fools' errand, IMO. I am not a conspiracy guy. I don't really think the refs are plotting to help Dallas and NE*. But, a "rule" like this sure can make it look that way. Again, let me see the Tuck Rule cited on a non-essential play (no turnover involved), early in the game, at midfield. Maybe it gets called all the time, and I just missed it. But, I watch a lot of NFL Football. Yeah, you're right, it is vague. It is like asuming something, as if the refs can read a guy's mind and know what he intended to do with the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnionAMG Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 So it's an incomplete pass, great. But didn't that ball go backwards yesterday? I agree... what Romo did yesterday, that shouldn't be any different than turning towards his left and throwing the ball to a RB in the flat backwards, who then drops it. The arm is moving forward at that start of the throwing motion, but at the point of release it's moving backwards, and should be considered a lateral. Romo is pulling the ball backwards and therefore shouldn't be considered a throwing motion. There's just TOO many damn stipulations to the rules these days. Simplifying things and having more universal rules would go a long way towards making the game easier to follow. What's to prevent a QB from as soon as he receives the snap, begins a throwing motion and then continuously swing his arm around in a circle, until he's ready to throw. In this case, his arm is either moving forward to throw the ball, or its coming down in a tuck and can't be ruled a fumble. This is obviously a joke, but I'd argue that by the rules it could be ruled that way. Just a thought at how ridiculous some of these rules have gotten. If 99 out of 100 impartial guys in a bar are watching a game, and they can watch the play and say Romo was obviously not throwing that ball... shouldn't it be a damn fumble! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hossage Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Im a little slow, but I am much smarter than any of the refs in the nfl. I think the rules should be simple because officiating is not easy. If you watch game film, offsides is only called correctly about half the time. I think it is too much to ask the officials to atherosclerose their way over to their to the play reviewer, look at slides of nifty animals, and make the right call on whatever the eff the tuck rule is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Yes, but that is part of the "rule". Didn't know that. Wow, it's even dumber than I originally thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 When you play certain teams like Dallas, you are fighting the refs and the NFL too. As far as I know the NFL pulled the Tuck rule out of its butt to cover themselves after that New England game. I refuse to believe it existed prior. All the Tuck rule does is give the refs a way to hose a team. PTR The funniest thing on TV is the NFL Network when they have on the head of the NFL officials try to explain away the BAD CALLS made the previous Sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Spartacus Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 If it wasn't a fumble for a Cardinals TD, and still a "Tuck Rule" - shouldn't that play have been a safety??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 If it wasn't a fumble for a Cardinals TD, and still a "Tuck Rule" - shouldn't that play have been a safety??? Because it goes in the books as an incomplete pass (if I'm not mistaken). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thoner7 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 When you read that it makes sense why the rule would be in place but at the same time i think that rule needs to be eleiminated WHAT??? No it doesn't. How does it make sense, that after the throwing motion is completed, but the ball not thrown, then (again, after the attempted throwing motion is complete) he fumbles, and it ruled an incomplete pass. Guess what, 99.999% of the time the QB "drops back to pass" he plans on throwing it, but doesnt always get to. He wanted to throw it, decided not to, then, later, he fumbled. How come every QB fumble doesn't fit under that rules juristiction, because unless its a QB draw, they were planning on throwing a pass, and thus whether the ball is moving backwards, forwards, or back in time it could potentially be ruled a "tuck" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfanmiami(oh) Posted October 14, 2008 Author Share Posted October 14, 2008 WHAT??? No it doesn't. How does it make sense, that after the throwing motion is completed, but the ball not thrown, then (again, after the attempted throwing motion is complete) he fumbles, and it ruled an incomplete pass. Guess what, 99.999% of the time the QB "drops back to pass" he plans on throwing it, but doesnt always get to. He wanted to throw it, decided not to, then, later, he fumbled. How come every QB fumble doesn't fit under that rules juristiction, because unless its a QB draw, they were planning on throwing a pass, and thus whether the ball is moving backwards, forwards, or back in time it could potentially be ruled a "tuck" Bingo. Shouldn't every QB throw in a pump fake as soon as he snaps the ball so that if he gets hit and fumbles it won't matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChimp Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 The Refs in both the NFL and the NCAA have gotten worse and worse every single year for the past decade. Seriously, why not just hire blind gophers, they could do as good a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 This has been the worst year for NFL officiating. Every week it's a new round of embarrassments. Did anyone see that ridiculous phantom pass interference call against the Lions that handed the Vikings the win? That tuck rule is asinine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts