Dutch's Random Ohio State Droppings
-
@tiamat63legitimate football question I wanted to ask. Do you think Smith fumbled through the back of the end zone?
By the letter of the law it seemed like he did
By the spirit of the law I think that's a TD
@tiamat63legitimate football question I wanted to ask. Do you think Smith fumbled through the back of the end zone?
By the letter of the law it seemed like he did
By the spirit of the law I think that's a TD
Football can be *very* subjective. As a fan of the game, I'm not prepared to open the grand canyon sized can of worms that this could potentially be.
Defensive fumbles through the endzone are one of the few rules remaining that benefit defenses. That said, we're aligned in this answer. Letter of the law, I'd say you could argue he's in the *process* of losing the ball. Spirit of the law? It's a touchdown because there is no *clear loss* of possession away from the body.
If we take this by the letter, then anytime a ball begins to move while contact occurs at or just before the goal-line, then we open pandora's box of being TOO subjective and arguing that the runner (who has established possession) was now losing possession of the ball. I just.... I don't want the game to go that way. If this was a UM player, I have to be consistent in my answer and say it still stands as a TD.
If the ball clearly fumbled out of Jeremiah's hands and away from him? So be it. It's a touchback and a lesson to hold onto the damn ball through the play. Few Buckeye fans seem to remember we've benefited from the other side of this - Lagarrete Blount fumbling through the endzone in the Rose Bowl. THAT was a clear loss of possession and I'm fine because it's cut and dry.
-
@tiamat63legitimate football question I wanted to ask. Do you think Smith fumbled through the back of the end zone?
By the letter of the law it seemed like he did
By the spirit of the law I think that's a TD
Football can be *very* subjective. As a fan of the game, I'm not prepared to open the grand canyon sized can of worms that this could potentially be.
Defensive fumbles through the endzone are one of the few rules remaining that benefit defenses. That said, we're aligned in this answer. Letter of the law, I'd say you could argue he's in the *process* of losing the ball. Spirit of the law? It's a touchdown because there is no *clear loss* of possession away from the body.
If we take this by the letter, then anytime a ball begins to move while contact occurs at or just before the goal-line, then we open pandora's box of being TOO subjective and arguing that the runner (who has established possession) was now losing possession of the ball. I just.... I don't want the game to go that way. If this was a UM player, I have to be consistent in my answer and say it still stands as a TD.
If the ball clearly fumbled out of Jeremiah's hands and away from him? So be it. It's a touchback and a lesson to hold onto the damn ball through the play. Few Buckeye fans seem to remember we've benefited from the other side of this - Lagarrete Blount fumbling through the endzone in the Rose Bowl. THAT was a clear loss of possession and I'm fine because it's cut and dry.
Football can be *very* subjective. As a fan of the game, I'm not prepared to open the grand canyon sized can of worms that this could potentially be.
Defensive fumbles through the endzone are one of the few rules remaining that benefit defenses. That said, we're aligned in this answer. Letter of the law, I'd say you could argue he's in the *process* of losing the ball. Spirit of the law? It's a touchdown because there is no *clear loss* of possession away from the body.
If we take this by the letter, then anytime a ball begins to move while contact occurs at or just before the goal-line, then we open pandora's box of being TOO subjective and arguing that the runner (who has established possession) was now losing possession of the ball. I just.... I don't want the game to go that way. If this was a UM player, I have to be consistent in my answer and say it still stands as a TD.
If the ball clearly fumbled out of Jeremiah's hands and away from him? So be it. It's a touchback and a lesson to hold onto the damn ball through the play. Few Buckeye fans seem to remember we've benefited from the other side of this - Lagarrete Blount fumbling through the endzone in the Rose Bowl. THAT was a clear loss of possession and I'm fine because it's cut and dry.
The fumble through the end zone resulting in a touchback and possession for the other team absolutely needs to be changed. Seems like way too harsh of a rule.
I don't necessarily think this being ruled a fumble would open up a can of worms on all small bobbles into the end zone, because in 99.99% instance that player is getting his next steps within the end zone, re-establishing possession. It was just in this instance where Smith's first step after bobbling was out of bounds.
I mean, I've seen egregious calls go OSUs way in these games (2016), and while this went their way here I can't really be that mad. Cuz it's a dumb rule and by the spirit of the game it's a TD.
Was just interesting hearing Gus, Joel, and their rules analyst say fumble. (Actually, I don't really care about Gus, dude is too annoying). And I was curious what your opinion was.
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
Football can be *very* subjective. As a fan of the game, I'm not prepared to open the grand canyon sized can of worms that this could potentially be.
Defensive fumbles through the endzone are one of the few rules remaining that benefit defenses. That said, we're aligned in this answer. Letter of the law, I'd say you could argue he's in the *process* of losing the ball. Spirit of the law? It's a touchdown because there is no *clear loss* of possession away from the body.
If we take this by the letter, then anytime a ball begins to move while contact occurs at or just before the goal-line, then we open pandora's box of being TOO subjective and arguing that the runner (who has established possession) was now losing possession of the ball. I just.... I don't want the game to go that way. If this was a UM player, I have to be consistent in my answer and say it still stands as a TD.
If the ball clearly fumbled out of Jeremiah's hands and away from him? So be it. It's a touchback and a lesson to hold onto the damn ball through the play. Few Buckeye fans seem to remember we've benefited from the other side of this - Lagarrete Blount fumbling through the endzone in the Rose Bowl. THAT was a clear loss of possession and I'm fine because it's cut and dry.
The fumble through the end zone resulting in a touchback and possession for the other team absolutely needs to be changed. Seems like way too harsh of a rule.
I don't necessarily think this being ruled a fumble would open up a can of worms on all small bobbles into the end zone, because in 99.99% instance that player is getting his next steps within the end zone, re-establishing possession. It was just in this instance where Smith's first step after bobbling was out of bounds.
I mean, I've seen egregious calls go OSUs way in these games (2016), and while this went their way here I can't really be that mad. Cuz it's a dumb rule and by the spirit of the game it's a TD.
Was just interesting hearing Gus, Joel, and their rules analyst say fumble. (Actually, I don't really care about Gus, dude is too annoying). And I was curious what your opinion was.
The fumble through the end zone resulting in a touchback and possession for the other team absolutely needs to be changed. Seems like way too harsh of a rule.
I don't necessarily think this being ruled a fumble would open up a can of worms on all small bobbles into the end zone, because in 99.99% instance that player is getting his next steps within the end zone, re-establishing possession. It was just in this instance where Smith's first step after bobbling was out of bounds.
I mean, I've seen egregious calls go OSUs way in these games (2016), and while this went their way here I can't really be that mad. Cuz it's a dumb rule and by the spirit of the game it's a TD.
Was just interesting hearing Gus, Joel, and their rules analyst say fumble. (Actually, I don't really care about Gus, dude is too annoying). And I was curious what your opinion was.
Once the ball broke the plane it didn't matter.. "Touchdown"... That's how the refs saw it.. Would I say it was completely clean?... It's debatable.. But.. We beat your ass anyway... It wouldn't have mattered..
-
Football can be *very* subjective. As a fan of the game, I'm not prepared to open the grand canyon sized can of worms that this could potentially be.
Defensive fumbles through the endzone are one of the few rules remaining that benefit defenses. That said, we're aligned in this answer. Letter of the law, I'd say you could argue he's in the *process* of losing the ball. Spirit of the law? It's a touchdown because there is no *clear loss* of possession away from the body.
If we take this by the letter, then anytime a ball begins to move while contact occurs at or just before the goal-line, then we open pandora's box of being TOO subjective and arguing that the runner (who has established possession) was now losing possession of the ball. I just.... I don't want the game to go that way. If this was a UM player, I have to be consistent in my answer and say it still stands as a TD.
If the ball clearly fumbled out of Jeremiah's hands and away from him? So be it. It's a touchback and a lesson to hold onto the damn ball through the play. Few Buckeye fans seem to remember we've benefited from the other side of this - Lagarrete Blount fumbling through the endzone in the Rose Bowl. THAT was a clear loss of possession and I'm fine because it's cut and dry.
The fumble through the end zone resulting in a touchback and possession for the other team absolutely needs to be changed. Seems like way too harsh of a rule.
I don't necessarily think this being ruled a fumble would open up a can of worms on all small bobbles into the end zone, because in 99.99% instance that player is getting his next steps within the end zone, re-establishing possession. It was just in this instance where Smith's first step after bobbling was out of bounds.
I mean, I've seen egregious calls go OSUs way in these games (2016), and while this went their way here I can't really be that mad. Cuz it's a dumb rule and by the spirit of the game it's a TD.
Was just interesting hearing Gus, Joel, and their rules analyst say fumble. (Actually, I don't really care about Gus, dude is too annoying). And I was curious what your opinion was.
The fumble through the end zone resulting in a touchback and possession for the other team absolutely needs to be changed. Seems like way too harsh of a rule.
In a world that has done everything possible to cater to offenses, as a DB it's nice to see some loves towards my side of the ball.
I don't necessarily think this being ruled a fumble would open up a can of worms on all small bobbles into the end zone, because in 99.99% instance that player is getting his next steps within the end zone, re-establishing possession. It was just in this instance where Smith's first step after bobbling was out of bounds.
Until it's argued that, with the bobble, the ground didn't cause a fumble and you could have a fight for possession IN the endzone. Then things get real dicey.
There is something to be said for the bobble when going OOB.
I mean, I've seen egregious calls go OSUs way in these games (2016), and while this went their way here I can't really be that mad. Cuz it's a dumb rule and by the spirit of the game it's a TD.
Was just interesting hearing Gus, Joel, and their rules analyst say fumble. (Actually, I don't really care about Gus, dude is too annoying). And I was curious what your opinion was.
Gus can be far too over the top. And I don't much care for Klatt these days.
-
Worth seeing this again CD. Rumor has it they want to rename Ann Arbor to "YEAH BUT..."
-
You mean like this....?
‐------------
--------------------
---------------------
-----------------------
----------------------
-------------------
Yeah, after months+ of the trolling here, the Stallions nonsense, etc, it was absolutely justified to respond to the trolliest buckeye posters that way. It was serving it back to them.
If I'm met with rational talk I'll give back rational talk. You generally give rational talk. Not trolling like the rest of them on here. Why I was surprised you went that route. But everyone is allowed to post however they want to post. I'm not that torn up about it.
But you do you. Take whatever level road you prefer. Bummer we lost be really had no expectations to win. Hopefully we can get some stuff right this off-season, our very young team will get another year in, etc.
Rooting for anyone but OSU in the CFP. Fingers crossed v
Yeah, after months+ of the trolling here, the Stallions nonsense, etc, it was absolutely justified to respond to the trolliest buckeye posters that way. It was serving it back to them.
If I'm met with rational talk I'll give back rational talk. You generally give rational talk. Not trolling like the rest of them on here. Why I was surprised you went that route. But everyone is allowed to post however they want to post. I'm not that torn up about it.
But you do you. Take whatever level road you prefer. Bummer we lost be really had no expectations to win. Hopefully we can get some stuff right this off-season, our very young team will get another year in, etc.
Rooting for anyone but OSU in the CFP. Fingers crossed v
-
-
Yeah, after months+ of the trolling here, the Stallions nonsense, etc, it was absolutely justified to respond to the trolliest buckeye posters that way. It was serving it back to them.
If I'm met with rational talk I'll give back rational talk. You generally give rational talk. Not trolling like the rest of them on here. Why I was surprised you went that route. But everyone is allowed to post however they want to post. I'm not that torn up about it.
But you do you. Take whatever level road you prefer. Bummer we lost be really had no expectations to win. Hopefully we can get some stuff right this off-season, our very young team will get another year in, etc.
Rooting for anyone but OSU in the CFP. Fingers crossed v
Is this what's on the minds of our emotional Michigan fans?
-
-
-
-
-
-
Oh boo freaking hoo. "Class" haha. Alright
they are laughing at you woody
-
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