Fumble through the end zone

[Dawgs31]

Dumbest rule in sports that the other team gets the ball

[Cowbell]

Dumbest rule in sports that the other team gets the ball

I agree! It drives me crazy! I will never forget us getting screwed on this call in overtime when Ballard fumbled in OT against Arkansas in 2010.

[Jack Lambert]

It cost us the Maine game.

[RocketDawg]

The ball also went out of bounds before the goal line. Not a touchback.

[the_real_MSU_is_us]

I hate it so much. Fumble at the 6 and it rolls out at the 1? no problem, you keep the ball we just spot it at the 6. Fumble at the 6, other team recovers it at their 1? Other teams' ball at the 1. Fumble at the 4 and it goes out the endzone? Other teams ball (though they didn't recover it) and they get 25 free yards for doing nothing. Neither part makes any sense. Spot the ball where it as fumbled and next down. Every year I hope it gets changed, yet it's never even brought up for consideration

[MetEdDawg]

I hate it so much. Fumble at the 6 and it rolls out at the 1? no problem, you keep the ball we just spot it at the 6. Fumble at the 6, other team recovers it at their 1? Other teams' ball at the 1. Fumble at the 4 and it goes out the endzone? Other teams ball (though they didn't recover it) and they get 25 free yards for doing nothing. Neither part makes any sense. Spot the ball where it as fumbled and next down. Every year I hope it gets changed, yet it's never even brought up for consideration

This is what I have a problem with. Rules are different in the normal field of play and the end zone. How can you fumble a ball forward and have different rules if it goes out at the 1 yard line or at the goal line?

The rule in the field of play is you take the ball back to where it was fumbled, but if it goes through the end zone you don't? Doesn't make sense.

[thf24]

My opinion has been for a while that if you can arbitrarily place the ball at the 1 after pass interference in the end zone, then there's no reason you can't arbitrarily place it at the 1 after a fumble through the end zone.

[TimberBeast]

It’s the right call for the rules, on pass interference there’s no possession of the ball. When the ball is fumbled and it goes out of the endzone there is no choice but a touchback. Anything else makes no sense without changing the rules.

[Leroy Jenkins]

I hate it so much. Fumble at the 6 and it rolls out at the 1? no problem, you keep the ball we just spot it at the 6. Fumble at the 6, other team recovers it at their 1? Other teams' ball at the 1. Fumble at the 4 and it goes out the endzone? Other teams ball (though they didn't recover it) and they get 25 free yards for doing nothing. Neither part makes any sense. Spot the ball where it as fumbled and next down. Every year I hope it gets changed, yet it's never even brought up for consideration

Because the goal line is involved..... The rules say if you provide the impetus for the ball to cross the opponents goal you are responsible for recovering it or its a touchback. Same as a kickoff or punt. Now, if the ball goes out of bounds after it crosses the goal line (just as if you punted it or kicked it) its impossible for you to recover it ... so, touchback.

So, couple factors if the goal line is involved:
1. Which team provided the impetus
2. is the ball recoverable

[mstatefan91]

If you put the ball through the offensive scoring endzone on any play other than an incomplete pass.. it's a touchback... What's the alternative? Ball at the 1" line?

I guess you could do ball where fumble occurred..

[TimberBeast]

If you put the ball through the offensive scoring endzone on any play other than an incomplete pass.. it's a touchback... What's the alternative? Ball at the 1" line?

I guess you could do ball where fumble occurred..

So you change the rules because you were close to the endzone? You could I guess but they would have to change things. As it stands now that’s a touchback and it can’t be anything else. If you don’t want it to be a touchback don’t fumble it.

[mstatefan91]

So you change the rules because you were close to the endzone? You could I guess but they would have to change things. As it stands now that’s a touchback and it can’t be anything else. If you don’t want it to be a touchback don’t fumble it.

I was playing devil's advocate.. I understand the rule and agree with it as frustrating as it can be when it occurs to you.

[Liverpooldawg]

Dumbest rule in sports that the other team gets the ball

Absolutely. It should be the possessing team's ball at the one.

[TimberBeast]

I was playing devil's advocate.. I understand the rule and agree with it as frustrating as it can be when it occurs to you.

No I know just saying it can’t go any other way, I know what you meant.

[mstatefan91]

Absolutely. It should be the possessing team's ball at the one.

So if ball is fumbled at 5 and goes out across the goal line, it should be possessing teams ball at 1? Don't agree with that at all... most I would go with is possessing team's ball where fumble occurred.

[TimberBeast]

Absolutely. It should be the possessing team's ball at the one.

Disagree completely, how do you get it at the one? Why? Once it goes out of the endzone the offense no longer has possession. The only option is a touchback.

[the_real_MSU_is_us]

Disagree completely, how do you get it at the one? Why? Once it goes out of the endzone the offense no longer has possession. The only option is a touchback.

Timber, all your posts are merely stating "The rules say it's a touchback". Nobody is denying that it's a touchback, we're saying that rule should be changed. I don't disagree that the current touchback ruling is correct given the current rules.

It's like saying "I hate X law" and responding "But that's the law, cops have to enforce it"... we agree the cops should enforce the law and that they probably have the correct interpretation of said law, we just want the law itself changed. The fact X law exists isn't in and of itself justification for it to. In the same way, just because the touchback rules are stupid doesn't mean they should stay that way.

[TimberBeast]

Timber, all your posts are merely stating "The rules say it's a touchback". Nobody is denying that it's a touchback, we're saying that rule should be changed. I don't disagree that the current touchback ruling is correct given the current rules.

It's like saying "I hate X law" and responding "But that's the law, cops have to enforce it"... we agree the cops should enforce the law and that they probably have the correct interpretation of said law, we just want the law itself changed. The fact X law exists isn't in and of itself justification for it to. In the same way, just because the touchback rules are stupid doesn't mean they should stay that way.

Well actually I don’t think it should be changed. How do you change it? What reasoning do you have for just giving the ball back to the offense in that situation? The endzone is the end of the line, once it’s fumbled out of there you screwed up, touchback. I don’t get what else you would do, putting it at the one yard line is crazy.

[Liverpooldawg]

So if ball is fumbled at 5 and goes out across the goal line, it should be possessing teams ball at 1? Don't agree with that at all... most I would go with is possessing team's ball where fumble occurred.

The defense, in this case, had their chance. If the get it they get it at the 20. Id be fine with giving it to the offense where the fumble occurred. Giving it to the defense when they never recovered the ball is just not right. Now if WE benefit from it as it stands...……I'm all for it! LOL. Bad rule though.

[Quaoarsking]

Well actually I don?t think it should be changed. How do you change it? What reasoning do you have for just giving the ball back to the offense in that situation? The endzone is the end of the line, once it?s fumbled out of there you screwed up, touchback. I don?t get what else you would do, putting it at the one yard line is crazy.

Why should there be drastically different outcomes for fumbling out of bounds 6 inches in front of the end zone and fumbling six inches into the end zone? It doesn't hang together logically.

[mstatefan91]

Why should there be drastically different outcomes for fumbling out of bounds 6 inches in front of the end zone and fumbling six inches into the end zone? It doesn't hang together logically.

Why should there be drastically different outcomes for catching a ball with one toe on the green as opposed to one toe on the white? Doesn't hang together logically.


The endzone is the endzone.. ball goes out of the endzone while possessing it carries a penalty.

[TimberBeast]

Why should there be drastically different outcomes for fumbling out of bounds 6 inches in front of the end zone and fumbling six inches into the end zone? It doesn't hang together logically.

Because it?s the END zone, that?s it. There are no more yards. Possession of the ball, resulting in a fumble, before the endzone, it?s over. Anything after that is a touchback and IT SHOULD BE. What else should happen and why?

[somebodyshotmypaw]

I hate it so much. Fumble at the 6 and it rolls out at the 1? no problem, you keep the ball we just spot it at the 6. Fumble at the 6, other team recovers it at their 1? Other teams' ball at the 1. Fumble at the 4 and it goes out the endzone? Other teams ball (though they didn't recover it) and they get 25 free yards for doing nothing. Neither part makes any sense. Spot the ball where it as fumbled and next down. Every year I hope it gets changed, yet it's never even brought up for consideration

Agree with your point. However, I think it comes out to the 20, not the 25.

[Quaoarsking]

One way I like to evaluate proposed rule changes is pretend that the proposal has always been in effect and think whether people would be proposing to changing it to the way it is in real life.

So imagine that a fumble out the end zone were treated like any other fumble out of bounds and put at the 1 or the spot of the fumble or wherever. Would anyone be saying, "no, that shouldn't be how it is. We should make it an automatic turnover to the other team!" No, I don't think anyone would be arguing that.

[shannondawg]

If all this discussion is about the TAM loss yesterday, it was home cooking for the #2 team, that ball did not go thru the end zone.

[Bully13]

Thankfully this rarely happens so the most 17'd up rule in football rarely gets used. Everybody knows why the "Ken Stabler" rule was "invented". That made sense. There is no incentive for a ball carrier to fumble near the goal line. What an undeserving jack pot for a team that just gave up a long drive. Since neither team recovered the fumble, the last team with possession must have possession returned to them where the ball carrier lost control. There is no other logical answer.

[Bully13]

Because it?s the END zone, that?s it. There are no more yards. Possession of the ball, resulting in a fumble, before the endzone, it?s over. Anything after that is a touchback and IT SHOULD BE. What else should happen and why?

Comparing a kickoff or punt that goes into the end zone to a fumble after a team has driven to the goal line is the dumbest analogy I've seen in a long time.

[Lord McBuckethead]

Absolutely. It should be the possessing team's ball at the one.

Nope. It should be the possessing teams ball at the point of the fumble. Just like any other fumble that goes forward.

If you fumble at the 50, and it rolls out of bounds at the 40, you still maintain that ball at the 50. It doesn't magically become the other teams ball.

[TrapGame]

If a player fumbles at the 3 yard line and the ball rolls out through the end zone the possessing team should get the ball at the point of the fumble, the 3 yard line.

[Bully13]

Because it?s the END zone, that?s it. There are no more yards. Possession of the ball, resulting in a fumble, before the endzone, it?s over. Anything after that is a touchback and IT SHOULD BE. What else should happen and why?

try reading the other posts and you will get your answer instead of throwing shit around just to be throwing shit around.

[TimberBeast]

try reading the other posts and you will get your answer instead of throwing shit around just to be throwing shit around.

What shit did I throw around? I don’t give a damn what the other posts say, the rule is the rule and it shouldn’t be any other way. The ball going out of bounds at the 1 yard line isn’t the same as going out of bounds in the endzone. That’s why the rule is what it is. Can it be changed? Of course but to me it makes much less sense that a fumble out of the endzone magically appears at the one than going to the other team.

[TimberBeast]

Comparing a kickoff or punt that goes into the end zone to a fumble after a team has driven to the goal line is the dumbest analogy I've seen in a long time.

It’s exactly the same thing. The offense, or the team with the ball, is turning over possession of the ball to the other team by “losing” it through the endzone. Whether punt, kickoff, or fumble, it’s a touchback. I’m not even sure why this is questioned. Just because your team worked their ass off getting all the way down the field and then fumbled it out of the endzone doesn’t change the touchback rule. It’s simple stuff.

[Sienfield]

It’s exactly the same thing. The offense, or the team with the ball, is turning over possession of the ball to the other team by “losing” it through the endzone. Whether punt, kickoff, or fumble, it’s a touchback. I’m not even sure why this is questioned. Just because your team worked their ass off getting all the way down the field and then fumbled it out of the endzone doesn’t change the touchback rule. It’s simple stuff.

So if a team drops a pass in the endzone that should be a touchback for the other team? It
s dropped in the end zone as you say so it must turn over to the other team.

[mparkerfd20]

This thread is proof you can't argue with idiots.

[EdDawg]

I'm not a big fan of the rule either, but if it's changed let's think about the opposite situation a second.

Offense has the ball on their own 1 yard line the ball is fumbled and goes through the back of the endzone. As it currently stands that is a safety, but if changed and using the same general rule as the other end of the field the offense would get the ball back at their own 1.

I think the reasoning for the current rule is that if either situation happens then it's a change of possession. If it's changed then you have two totally different rules just because of field position.

[Bully13]

I'm not a big fan of the rule either, but if it's changed let's think about the opposite situation a second.

Offense has the ball on their own 1 yard line the ball is fumbled and goes through the back of the endzone. As it currently stands that is a safety, but if changed and using the same general rule as the other end of the field the offense would get the ball back at their own 1.

I think the reasoning for the current rule is that if either situation happens then it's a change of possession. If it's changed then you have two totally different rules just because of field position.

If the defense recovers, THEN they get the ball back. If NOBODY recovers, it must go back to the last team that possessed the ball. No team should be the beneficiary of a fumble recovery unless they recover a fumble. It's not that hard to figure out.

[EdDawg]

If the defense recovers, THEN they get the ball back. If NOBODY recovers, it must go back to the last team that possessed the ball. No team should be the beneficiary of a fumble recovery unless they recover a fumble. It's not that hard to figure out.

I understand that and like I said I don't like the rule. However I also don't like that a fumbled ball can advance field position (think about the Arkansas game last year.) Where ever the ball is fumbled it should be placed if recovered. I was just stated that cannot be done on the other end of the field, because for the offense to retain possession after fumbling in their own endzone the ball must be advanced back to the 1 yard line.

Again I don't like the rule, I was frustrated like everyone else back in 2010 at the Arkansas game. I was just attempting to take a guess at why the rule is the way it is.

[HoopsCoach21]

What shit did I throw around? I don?t give a damn what the other posts say, the rule is the rule and it shouldn?t be any other way. The ball going out of bounds at the 1 yard line isn?t the same as going out of bounds in the endzone. That?s why the rule is what it is. Can it be changed? Of course but to me it makes much less sense that a fumble out of the endzone magically appears at the one than going to the other team.


Why is it ok for the ball to be as you described it "magically" placed at the point of the fumble when it is fumbled out of bounds anywhere else on the field? Magic is allowable everywhere else i guess.

It should be placed at the spot of the fumble just like every other fumble that goes out of bounds.

[Technetium]

Offense has the ball on their own 1 yard line the ball is fumbled and goes through the back of the endzone. As it currently stands that is a safety, but if changed and using the same general rule as the other end of the field the offense would get the ball back at their own 1.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the current rule says that a fumble backwards results in the ball being spotted where it went out of bounds (as compared to a forward fumble, which is not allowed to advance the ball).

So now with the assumption that a fumble (with no possession before going OOB) can (by current rule) result in lost yardage, but cannot result in gained yardage (and is instead spotted at the point the ball was fumbled).

First Extreme: Offense fumbles just before goal line and ball bounces out of endzone. Without creating special endzone rules, this results in ball being placed at the spot of the fumble (e.g., 1" mark, 1 yard line, or wherever the player was when he fumbled).

Second Extreme: Offense fumbles on their own goal line, and ball bounces out of endzone. Without creating any special endzone rules, this results in the ball being placed where it went out of bounds. Since that would place the ball as "down" within their own endzone, then pre-snap this fulfills the requirement of a safety.

[TheDawg205]

May be in the minority here, but I'm a fan of the rule as it is. It emphasizes ball security around the endzone. Without the rule you could make crazy attempts around the pylon to score without any consequences. No doubt the rule is frustrating when you're on the wrong side of it, though.

[EdDawg]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the current rule says that a fumble backwards results in the ball being spotted where it went out of bounds (as compared to a forward fumble, which is not allowed to advance the ball).

So now with the assumption that a fumble (with no possession before going OOB) can (by current rule) result in lost yardage, but cannot result in gained yardage (and is instead spotted at the point the ball was fumbled).

First Extreme: Offense fumbles just before goal line and ball bounces out of endzone. Without creating special endzone rules, this results in ball being placed at the spot of the fumble (e.g., 1" mark, 1 yard line, or wherever the player was when he fumbled).

Second Extreme: Offense fumbles on their own goal line, and ball bounces out of endzone. Without creating any special endzone rules, this results in the ball being placed where it went out of bounds. Since that would place the ball as "down" within their own endzone, then pre-snap this fulfills the requirement of a safety.

I guess when the rules were written the loss yardage of a fumble was to "penalize" the offense for fumbling, but they didn't want to reward the offense for fumbling (thus not be able to advance a fumble out of bounds.)

That's just my best guess of why they wrote the rules the way they did.

[StateDawg44]

It cost us the Maine game.

I meaaaaaan.... that is no excuse haha.