The Last Fumble Was NOT a Fumble... Upon Further Review...
-
I'm too lazy to look it up but the rules define fumble and it's very clear. We fumbled it. I don't know HOW that dumbass fumbled it again, but he did.
-
The LOS question above is a good one, but I can't find any rule rule that says a handoff has to be behind the LOS. My guess is that as with a lateral s long as the handoff is not forward, then it is legal. But I see something else anyway...
The issue I see is that Hunt's knee appears to be on the ground as he gains control of "the handoff" and he's in contact with the DE that caused the fumble. That's Hunt's Nike at the bottom of the first screenshot just left of center. While you cannot see his knee down from that angle the second screenshot clearly shows that his knee is on the ground.
In other words... Hunt was down by conduct short of the 1st down.
The LOS question above is a good one, but I can't find any rule rule that says a handoff has to be behind the LOS. My guess is that as with a lateral s long as the handoff is not forward, then it is legal. But I see something else anyway...
The issue I see is that Hunt's knee appears to be on the ground as he gains control of "the handoff" and he's in contact with the DE that caused the fumble. That's Hunt's Nike at the bottom of the first screenshot just left of center. While you cannot see his knee down from that angle the second screenshot clearly shows that his knee is on the ground.
In other words... Hunt was down by conduct short of the 1st down.
This is the only logical explanation I’ve heard at this point. What did the ref say?? I couldn’t hear because I was in a bar
-
The LOS question above is a good one, but I can't find any rule rule that says a handoff has to be behind the LOS. My guess is that as with a lateral s long as the handoff is not forward, then it is legal. But I see something else anyway...
The issue I see is that Hunt's knee appears to be on the ground as he gains control of "the handoff" and he's in contact with the DE that caused the fumble. That's Hunt's Nike at the bottom of the first screenshot just left of center. While you cannot see his knee down from that angle the second screenshot clearly shows that his knee is on the ground.
In other words... Hunt was down by conduct short of the 1st down.
The LOS question above is a good one, but I can't find any rule rule that says a handoff has to be behind the LOS. My guess is that as with a lateral s long as the handoff is not forward, then it is legal. But I see something else anyway...
The issue I see is that Hunt's knee appears to be on the ground as he gains control of "the handoff" and he's in contact with the DE that caused the fumble. That's Hunt's Nike at the bottom of the first screenshot just left of center. While you cannot see his knee down from that angle the second screenshot clearly shows that his knee is on the ground.
In other words... Hunt was down by conduct short of the 1st down.
Tour there are "handoffs" or tosses beyond the line of scrimmage quite often. The hook and lateral plays or a speed option in which the the qb (or wr Jarvis Landry in our case) passes the line before tossing it back to the running back. Those are just extended handoffs. I think it was correctly ruled but don't think line of scrimmage has anything to do with it. Another thing is if he had crossed the line of scrimmage and that's what made it illegal than it should have been first down since they took it back to point in which baker fumbled. It was 4th and inches so if he fully crossed the line he got the first down prior to fumbling.
Good catch on hunt's knee being down but the question would be was he touched by an opposing player while his knee is down. If he wasn't then he would not have been ruled down by contact.
Again regardless I don't think the refs botched this one. It was clearly a fumble. If baker looked like he was trying to pitch it back because he knew he was being stopped short then it would be a different story.
-
The LOS question above is a good one, but I can't find any rule rule that says a handoff has to be behind the LOS. My guess is that as with a lateral s long as the handoff is not forward, then it is legal. But I see something else anyway...
The issue I see is that Hunt's knee appears to be on the ground as he gains control of "the handoff" and he's in contact with the DE that caused the fumble. That's Hunt's Nike at the bottom of the first screenshot just left of center. While you cannot see his knee down from that angle the second screenshot clearly shows that his knee is on the ground.
In other words... Hunt was down by conduct short of the 1st down.
This is the only logical explanation I’ve heard at this point. What did the ref say?? I couldn’t hear because I was in a bar
This is the only logical explanation I’ve heard at this point. What did the ref say?? I couldn’t hear because I was in a bar
The ref said the ball can only be advanced by player who originally fumbled it therefore it would be taken back to the spot at which it was fumbled. That spot was determined to be short of the line to gain. Turnover on downs 1st down jets
-
But this does beg the question:
What constitutes a fumble? If a runner loses the ball and another offensive player behind him catches the ball mid-air how is that different than a pitch back? Because it didn't look good? Either way, Player 1 is ahead of Player 2, and without the ball touching the ground the ball goes from Player 1 to Player 2. And LOS shouldn't matter. How many option plays happened when the QB goes around end and then pitches to his trailing back when he's already past the LOS?
Seems to me that for it to be considered a fumble, that another player could not advance (due to the Raiders Holy Roller Game) the ball would have to hit the ground. No one bounce passes a football to a fellow offensive player on purpose.
^ The above was the official explanation. My video exercise was to show that even if the "handoff theory" was valid, then we still would have been short of the line to gain.
But this does beg the question:
What constitutes a fumble? If a runner loses the ball and another offensive player behind him catches the ball mid-air how is that different than a pitch back?
I'm too lazy to look it up but the rules define fumble and it's very clear. We fumbled it. I don't know HOW that dumbass fumbled it again, but he did.
Me, too... so I let google look it up...
Article 3 Fumble.A fumble is any act, other than a pass or kick, which results in a loss of player possession.
Not really sure that helps much... but it turns out that there is a 4th-down fumble rule that is clear.
Article 5 Fourth Down Fumble.If a fourth-down fumble occurs during a play from scrimmage: (a) The ball may be advanced by any member of the defensive team. (b) The player who fumbled is the only Team A player permitted to recover and advance the ball. (c) If the recovery or catch is by a teammate of the player who fumbled, the ball is dead, and the spot of the next snap is the spot of the fumble, or the spot of the recovery if the spot of the recovery is behind the spot of the fumble.
Also found verbiage helping to define a handoff... it speaks of a transfer of the ball with "no daylight", thus differentiating it from a toss or lateral.
Bottom line... the call was proper
also whats your all opinion mon the darnold quick whistle i think that was a fumble and browns td the ball looked out before arm went forward!
Play was so close that it should have been left to play out. Refs are instructed to do this now. Had they done so, then the field ruling would be "fumble" (and TD Browns) and it would not have been overturned if the review as it happened simply let the play stand.
That said...
I never heard whether the call on the field of an incomplete pass was confirmed or simply left to stand. I suspect the latter, but replayed the whole sequence and it was never stated in the TV broadcast.
Did anyone hear which it was on radio or other?
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
The Browns had already man-handled the Jets previously with qb sneaks. They bunched up to jam that play, and I was disappointed Stefanski ran it again. Once to the well too often, I think. With an intact oline, I figure they would have made it.
-
^ The above was the official explanation. My video exercise was to show that even if the "handoff theory" was valid, then we still would have been short of the line to gain.
But this does beg the question:
What constitutes a fumble? If a runner loses the ball and another offensive player behind him catches the ball mid-air how is that different than a pitch back?
I'm too lazy to look it up but the rules define fumble and it's very clear. We fumbled it. I don't know HOW that dumbass fumbled it again, but he did.
Me, too... so I let google look it up...
Article 3 Fumble.A fumble is any act, other than a pass or kick, which results in a loss of player possession.
Not really sure that helps much... but it turns out that there is a 4th-down fumble rule that is clear.
Article 5 Fourth Down Fumble.If a fourth-down fumble occurs during a play from scrimmage: (a) The ball may be advanced by any member of the defensive team. (b) The player who fumbled is the only Team A player permitted to recover and advance the ball. (c) If the recovery or catch is by a teammate of the player who fumbled, the ball is dead, and the spot of the next snap is the spot of the fumble, or the spot of the recovery if the spot of the recovery is behind the spot of the fumble.
Also found verbiage helping to define a handoff... it speaks of a transfer of the ball with "no daylight", thus differentiating it from a toss or lateral.
Bottom line... the call was proper
also whats your all opinion mon the darnold quick whistle i think that was a fumble and browns td the ball looked out before arm went forward!
Play was so close that it should have been left to play out. Refs are instructed to do this now. Had they done so, then the field ruling would be "fumble" (and TD Browns) and it would not have been overturned if the review as it happened simply let the play stand.
That said...
I never heard whether the call on the field of an incomplete pass was confirmed or simply left to stand. I suspect the latter, but replayed the whole sequence and it was never stated in the TV broadcast.
Did anyone hear which it was on radio or other?
That said...
I never heard whether the call on the field of an incomplete pass was confirmed or simply left to stand. I suspect the latter, but replayed the whole sequence and it was never stated in the TV broadcast.
Did anyone hear which it was on radio or other?
They said the call was left to stand. I agreed with Trent Green on that one, whatever the calm was, it was bound to be left to stand. Which sucks twice because we scored.
This team should be above all of that, though. The sneak was pretty sad.
-
No matter what, we lost & yesterday's game is over. Steelers coming up & we're still in the hunt.
GO BROWNS!
Mike
-
No matter what, we lost & yesterday's game is over. Steelers coming up & we're still in the hunt.
GO BROWNS!
Mike
No matter what, we lost & yesterday's game is over. Steelers coming up & we're still in the hunt.
GO BROWNS!
Mike
This is what I need. Because I'm really sad.
-
Something about the Casper Rule?
I don't know much. I'm fuckin drunk and sick and tired of NFL refs. 1988 Wildcard game vs Houston, 1986 Karlis was wide left, etc.
Beat the dreaded Steelers, somehow, some way. Exorcise the demons. Won't be easy of course.
I hate the "woe is me" stuff but today I felt it & hated it. Reality is if you're down 5 or 6 starters, you're most likely doomed. Fuuuuuuuu
Something about the Casper Rule?
I don't know much. I'm fuckin drunk and sick and tired of NFL refs. 1988 Wildcard game vs Houston, 1986 Karlis was wide left, etc.
Beat the dreaded Steelers, somehow, some way. Exorcise the demons. Won't be easy of course.
I hate the "woe is me" stuff but today I felt it & hated it. Reality is if you're down 5 or 6 starters, you're most likely doomed. Fuuuuuuuu
don't fumble the ball on a qb sneak...and it was a fumble and the holy roller rule then applied as they say.....bakers fumbled the ball....end of story....the one call you really should be upset was the garrett strip and the asshole refs blew an early whistle...they were supposed to have changed that early whistle thing to let the down play out....it was a fumble and td for us...thats where we got fucked...not the baker fumble...
-
After researching the definition of a fumble by nfl standards today the correct call was made. Regardless of it going backwards and never hitting the ground.
After researching the definition of a fumble by nfl standards today the correct call was made. Regardless of it going backwards and never hitting the ground.
Fuck the NFL and their shitass rules... They STINK!
-
-
Our OL just got DOMINATED & playcalling surprised MANY, including me, but I'm not qualified to critique the pros.
Bottom line folks is that we lost, the game is over, & we MUST beat the Steelers to get to the playoffs.
All that being said, we started the season with a new front office, new coaching staff, new offensive & defensive schemes, no training camp, many injuries, & the WORST we can be after this season is 10-6 & no playoffs this year. Not too shabby! I think we are 1-2 years "ahead of schedule" & I'll be fine with that. It's been an exciting, entertaining year.
Now let's kick the Steelers asses....(if Rudolph starts, kick a little MORE than his ass!)
Mike
-
Our OL just got DOMINATED & playcalling surprised MANY, including me, but I'm not qualified to critique the pros.
Bottom line folks is that we lost, the game is over, & we MUST beat the Steelers to get to the playoffs.
All that being said, we started the season with a new front office, new coaching staff, new offensive & defensive schemes, no training camp, many injuries, & the WORST we can be after this season is 10-6 & no playoffs this year. Not too shabby! I think we are 1-2 years "ahead of schedule" & I'll be fine with that. It's been an exciting, entertaining year.
Now let's kick the Steelers asses....(if Rudolph starts, kick a little MORE than his ass!)
Mike
Our OL just got DOMINATED & playcalling surprised MANY, including me, but I'm not qualified to critique the pros.
Bottom line folks is that we lost, the game is over, & we MUST beat the Steelers to get to the playoffs.
All that being said, we started the season with a new front office, new coaching staff, new offensive & defensive schemes, no training camp, many injuries, & the WORST we can be after this season is 10-6 & no playoffs this year. Not too shabby! I think we are 1-2 years "ahead of schedule" & I'll be fine with that. It's been an exciting, entertaining year.
Now let's kick the Steelers asses....(if Rudolph starts, kick a little MORE than his ass!)
Mike
LOL YEP !
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login