Goodell, please change this rule (1 Viewer)

[Captain Spaulding]

Team fumbles out of the endzone. Ball is given to the opposition at the 20 yard line.

Why hasn't this rule been changed? I think this is the most inconsistent/unjustified rules in the NFL.

Opposition never recovers the fumble but yet they are granted the ball AND given usually 15-20 yards as a bonus.

How again does this promote "offense" and scoring which is an objective of the NFL. In fact it isn't even a consistent rule. If you fumble out of bounds along the sideline the offense retains ball. If you fumble out of endzone, the other team gets the ball +20 yards. The defense didn't do anything "better" to justify that reward.

Long overdue for a rule change, just my opinion!

Give the ball back to the offense at the spot of the fumble and the lost down just like fumbling out of bounds along the sideline. That should just be a common sense rule change.

 

[dgreen]

How again does this promote "offense" and scoring which is an objective of the NFL.

That's not an objective of the NFL, unless, of course, scoring is down.Also, changing this rule would have a microscopic affect on overall scoring in the NFL.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Simple Answer.

Don't fumble.

 

[uwgb96]

I have to agree on that. I've always found it odd that if you fumble and it goes out at the 1 yard line you get it back there, but just a little further and the other team gets it back without even recovering it????

How about putting it back to the 20 yard line, but the offense gets it back at that point instead of the turnover. Seems like that would still be a huge penalty.

 

[guderian]

If the ball goes out of bounds in the end zone, where are you going to spot the ball? The 20 makes sense since it's essentially a touchback. If you give the ball back to the offense on, say the 1 yard line, you're encouraging them to do all kind of gimmicky reaching type plays to try and cross the goal line without worrying about losing the ball.

All touchbacks result in the team getting the ball on the 20--so that's not inconsistent with the way they treat a fumble out of the end zone.

 

[GDogg]

If the ball goes out of bounds in the end zone, where are you going to spot the ball? The 20 makes sense since it's essentially a touchback. If you give the ball back to the offense on, say the 1 yard line, you're encouraging them to do all kind of gimmicky reaching type plays to try and cross the goal line without worrying about losing the ball.All touchbacks result in the team getting the ball on the 20--so that's not inconsistent with the way they treat a fumble out of the end zone.

Touchbacks aren't the same as fumbles, though. A fumble out of bounds anywhere else on the field gets spotted at the spot where the ball went out of bounds. It's completely inconsistent and really makes absolutely no sense why this changes if it happens to occur in the end zone. This same rule has actually been huge in college football this year. UCLA and Oregon, among others, were victims to this bizarre rule.And, what's gimmicky about reaching to try and cross the goal line? Teams already do it and they do it all over the field. The only place they are actually punished for this is down at the goal line. It's simply inconsistent.

 

[Fallerjw]

You could look at it a different way. It's a reward to the defense for digging in and making a play near the end zone.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

How again does this promote "offense" and scoring which is an objective of the NFL.

That's not an objective of the NFL, unless, of course, scoring is down.Also, changing this rule would have a microscopic affect on overall scoring in the NFL.

I agree, it is a play that is relatively rare, and fairly immaterial to the overall NFL package, but it just clearly seems like a rule that was established in the infancy of football and has been carried forward since inception (or football in general?) and hasn't been changed. Its just not the best ruling (just my opinion).I've seen it happen a few times over the years and everytime I'm outraged (even when its a team I don't particularly want to win the game).

 

[GDogg]

You could look at it a different way. It's a reward to the defense for digging in and making a play near the end zone.

Why aren't they rewarded for making a play at midfield?This seems to happen a lot with players diving to score a TD, and losing the grip on the football and having it roll out the back or side of the endzone. Often times, the defense has little or nothing to do with the fumble.

 

[Fallerjw]

You could look at it a different way. It's a reward to the defense for digging in and making a play near the end zone.

Why aren't they rewarded for making a play at midfield?This seems to happen a lot with players diving to score a TD, and losing the grip on the football and having it roll out the back or side of the endzone. Often times, the defense has little or nothing to do with the fumble.

I was just trying to give another view.

 

[redman]

If the ball goes out of bounds in the end zone, where are you going to spot the ball? The 20 makes sense since it's essentially a touchback. If you give the ball back to the offense on, say the 1 yard line, you're encouraging them to do all kind of gimmicky reaching type plays to try and cross the goal line without worrying about losing the ball.All touchbacks result in the team getting the ball on the 20--so that's not inconsistent with the way they treat a fumble out of the end zone.

 

[Skilo]

Simple Answer.Don't fumble.

 

[NEUPJ]

What if they fumble it out the back of their own endzone? Should they get the ball back on the 1 because its not really their fault and they shouldn't be penalized for fumbling out of the their own endzone? After all the other team never recovered, how is this any ways to promote offense?

 

[The Moz]

Give it back to the offense at the 20 -- with the same down and still goal to go ???

 

[switz]

Team fumbles out of the endzone. Ball is given to the opposition at the 20 yard line.Why hasn't this rule been changed? I think this is the most inconsistent/unjustified rules in the NFL.Opposition never recovers the fumble but yet they are granted the ball AND given usually 15-20 yards as a bonus.How again does this promote "offense" and scoring which is an objective of the NFL. In fact it isn't even a consistent rule. If you fumble out of bounds along the sideline the offense retains ball. If you fumble out of endzone, the other team gets the ball +20 yards. The defense didn't do anything "better" to justify that reward.Long overdue for a rule change, just my opinion!Give the ball back to the offense at the spot of the fumble and the lost down just like fumbling out of bounds along the sideline. That should just be a common sense rule change.

I think it's one of the best rules.

 

[humphrp]

This is different then fumbling along the sidelines. Once the ball crosses the plan of the goaline if still in the possession of the offense it is a touchdown. That means that it has to be out of the control of the offense before it reaches the goalline. This would lessen the frequency of a fumble out of the endzone as compared to a fumble along the sidelines. I think changing this rule would be minor if anything

 

[BLOX]

The endzones are distinct areas on the football fields that have their own rules. Possession of the ball inside of these areas requires different rules vs the 100 yards between. Same goes for the boundaries.

I understand how it would benefit fantasy football though. It's a very good rule though. I doubt it will ever be changed.

 

[bigfeet_88]

Possession changes when the offense fumbles the ball out of bounds in either end zone (after the kick on the saftey). The rule seems right to me.

 

[mad sweeney]

How again does this promote "offense" and scoring which is an objective of the NFL.

That's not an objective of the NFL, unless, of course, scoring is down.Also, changing this rule would have a microscopic affect on overall scoring in the NFL.

I agree, it is a play that is relatively rare, and fairly immaterial to the overall NFL package, but it just clearly seems like a rule that was established in the infancy of football and has been carried forward since inception (or football in general?) and hasn't been changed. Its just not the best ruling (just my opinion).I've seen it happen a few times over the years and everytime I'm outraged (even when its a team I don't particularly want to win the game).

It's not entirely inconsistent. A safety results in the defensive team getting two points and getting the ball. Wouldn't one be enough? The end zone is a sepcial place and if you fumble into it it's a free for all. I like the rule, although if it were to be changed I'd support giving the ball to the O at the 20 as punishment for fumbling. But your original post is a little inaccurate. The most unfair, antiquated and one sided rule in football is no review of PI calls. You can get a 50 yard penalty based on a judgement call of a ref trying to keep up with pro athletes and seeing only 1 angle. Double and quadruple when the flag is thrown by an official who is further away. Or they need to have an incidental PI 15 yards from LoS) and a deliberate PI (spot of foul). But to not be able to challenge a call like that is ridiculous.

 

[Ozymandias]

Rules change in the end zone. The receiving team can down a kick in the end zone, and it goes to the 20. If they down it at the 1, it stays at the 1. If a receiver gains possession in the end zone, it is a touchdown, regardless of whether it is stripped from him a moment later. It is ruled a touchdown if it crosses the plane, regardless of whether it is actually touched down (think about that); if the offensive team fumbles it forward, through the end zone, they lose it.

End of story. Rules are rules.

Don't fumble it.

Rules are rules. If a receiver goes out of bounds and comes back in, and catches a pass, it is incomplete, even if the defense has had nothing to do with stopping him. That's the rule.

 

[Da Guru]

I have to agree on that. I've always found it odd that if you fumble and it goes out at the 1 yard line you get it back there, but just a little further and the other team gets it back without even recovering it????How about putting it back to the 20 yard line, but the offense gets it back at that point instead of the turnover. Seems like that would still be a huge penalty.

That makes sense, if it is first and goal from the one and you fumble out of the endzone you should retain possesion. To be brought back to the 20 seems like a big enough punishment.

 

[cobalt_27]

Team fumbles out of the endzone. Ball is given to the opposition at the 20 yard line.Why hasn't this rule been changed? I think this is the most inconsistent/unjustified rules in the NFL.Opposition never recovers the fumble but yet they are granted the ball AND given usually 15-20 yards as a bonus.How again does this promote "offense" and scoring which is an objective of the NFL. In fact it isn't even a consistent rule. If you fumble out of bounds along the sideline the offense retains ball. If you fumble out of endzone, the other team gets the ball +20 yards. The defense didn't do anything "better" to justify that reward.Long overdue for a rule change, just my opinion!Give the ball back to the offense at the spot of the fumble and the lost down just like fumbling out of bounds along the sideline. That should just be a common sense rule change.

I think it's one of the best rules.

Interesting and detailed position. Thanks for sharing.

 

[redman]

I've always found it odd that if you fumble and it goes out at the 1 yard line you get it back there, but just a little further and the other team gets it back without even recovering it???

Do you find it odd that if you sack the QB at the one yard line, that's where the ball is snapped on the next play, but if you sack him in the end zone it's a safety? The rules change there for both the offense and the defense.

 

[Ace Matherton]

Team fumbles out of the endzone. Ball is given to the opposition at the 20 yard line.Why hasn't this rule been changed? I think this is the most inconsistent/unjustified rules in the NFL.Opposition never recovers the fumble but yet they are granted the ball AND given usually 15-20 yards as a bonus.How again does this promote "offense" and scoring which is an objective of the NFL. In fact it isn't even a consistent rule. If you fumble out of bounds along the sideline the offense retains ball. If you fumble out of endzone, the other team gets the ball +20 yards. The defense didn't do anything "better" to justify that reward.Long overdue for a rule change, just my opinion!Give the ball back to the offense at the spot of the fumble and the lost down just like fumbling out of bounds along the sideline. That should just be a common sense rule change.

So does this mean on kickoffs the team kicking should get the ball back for kicking it beyond the endzone? Same rule, you cant advance a fumble, you also cant fumble in the endzone, therfore if one fumbles and the ball rolls into the endzone (the other teams territory) and out of bounds no matter what the down the opposing team gets the ball. The ball once in the endzone is not possesed, when it rolls out of the endzon it is then possesed by the team who's endzone it rolled out of. The "better" the defense did was cause a fumble or keep the offense from recovering it, and the reward is justified. Should we cahnge the rule about the team who registers the safety getting the ball back too, they already got their reward why get the ball back as well.If the offense loses the ball why should they get it back? Why should they not be penalized for their mistake, or should we just allow for mulligans in football?

 

[Doug Drinen]

But your original post is a little inaccurate. The most unfair, antiquated and one sided rule in football is no review of PI calls. You can get a 50 yard penalty based on a judgement call of a ref trying to keep up with pro athletes and seeing only 1 angle. Double and quadruple when the flag is thrown by an official who is further away. Or they need to have an incidental PI 15 yards from LoS) and a deliberate PI (spot of foul). But to not be able to challenge a call like that is ridiculous.

Sorry for the hijack, but while on the topics of inconsistent rules and PI, why isn't the defense given the ball at the spot of the foul on offensive PI?The rationale for giving the offense the ball at the spot on defensive PI is that the offensive player would have caught the ball had there been no interference (isn't it?). So why not call it both ways?

 

[GDogg]

Team fumbles out of the endzone. Ball is given to the opposition at the 20 yard line.

Why hasn't this rule been changed? I think this is the most inconsistent/unjustified rules in the NFL.

Opposition never recovers the fumble but yet they are granted the ball AND given usually 15-20 yards as a bonus.

How again does this promote "offense" and scoring which is an objective of the NFL. In fact it isn't even a consistent rule. If you fumble out of bounds along the sideline the offense retains ball. If you fumble out of endzone, the other team gets the ball +20 yards. The defense didn't do anything "better" to justify that reward.

Long overdue for a rule change, just my opinion!

Give the ball back to the offense at the spot of the fumble and the lost down just like fumbling out of bounds along the sideline. That should just be a common sense rule change.

So does this mean on kickoffs the team kicking should get the ball back for kicking it beyond the endzone? Same rule, you cant advance a fumble, you also cant fumble in the endzone, therfore if one fumbles and the ball rolls into the endzone (the other teams territory) and out of bounds no matter what the down the opposing team gets the ball. The ball once in the endzone is not possesed, when it rolls out of the endzon it is then possesed by the team who's endzone it rolled out of. The "better" the defense did was cause a fumble or keep the offense from recovering it, and the reward is justified. Should we cahnge the rule about the team who registers the safety getting the ball back too, they already got their reward why get the ball back as well.If the offense loses the ball why should they get it back? Why should they not be penalized for their mistake, or should we just allow for mulligans in football?

Then why does the offense get the ball back if the exact same thing occurs at midfield? Doesn't this rationale apply regardless of where we are on the field?

 

[bigfeet_88]

Then why does the offense get the ball back if the exact same thing occurs at midfield? Doesn't this rationale apply regardless of where we are on the field?

Because the endzones have different rules than the midfield. You get tackled in midfield, the ball stays in your possesion in midfield (unless it is 4th down of course). Fumble the ball out of bounds in midfield you keep possession.If the ball starts in the field of play and you get tackled in the end zone, you either get a TD or a Safety and then possesion changes. Fumble the ball out of the end zone and possession changes.

 

[GDogg]

Then why does the offense get the ball back if the exact same thing occurs at midfield? Doesn't this rationale apply regardless of where we are on the field?

Because the endzones have different rules than the midfield. You get tackled in midfield, the ball stays in your possesion in midfield (unless it is 4th down of course). Fumble the ball out of bounds in midfield you keep possession.If the ball starts in the field of play and you get tackled in the end zone, you either get a TD or a Safety and then possesion changes. Fumble the ball out of the end zone and possession changes.

Trust me. I understand what the rule is. I know what happens when the ball goes into the endzone. That has nothing to do with this. As your first statement suggests, I was discussing the rationale for the rule.So, the reason the defense gets the ball is because "the endzones have different rules than the midfield?"When they came up with this rule, the rulemakers were contemplating what to do if the ball gets fumbled out of the end zone and the rationale they come up with is "the endzones have different rules than the midfield," so we'll do the opposite of what we do on 83% of the field?

 

[bigfeet_88]

Then why does the offense get the ball back if the exact same thing occurs at midfield? Doesn't this rationale apply regardless of where we are on the field?

Because the endzones have different rules than the midfield. You get tackled in midfield, the ball stays in your possesion in midfield (unless it is 4th down of course). Fumble the ball out of bounds in midfield you keep possession.If the ball starts in the field of play and you get tackled in the end zone, you either get a TD or a Safety and then possesion changes. Fumble the ball out of the end zone and possession changes.

Trust me. I understand what the rule is. I know what happens when the ball goes into the endzone. That has nothing to do with this. As your first statement suggests, I was discussing the rationale for the rule.So, the reason the defense gets the ball is because "the endzones have different rules than the midfield?"When they came up with this rule, the rulemakers were contemplating what to do if the ball gets fumbled out of the end zone and the rationale they come up with is "the endzones have different rules than the midfield," so we'll do the opposite of what we do on 83% of the field?

And the rationale is what I wrote.... You get tackled in midfield possesions stays with you. You fumble out of bounds possesion stays with you. You get tackled in the end zone, possesion changes. You fumble out of the end zone, then.... there is your rationale.

 

[GDogg]

Then why does the offense get the ball back if the exact same thing occurs at midfield? Doesn't this rationale apply regardless of where we are on the field?

Because the endzones have different rules than the midfield. You get tackled in midfield, the ball stays in your possesion in midfield (unless it is 4th down of course). Fumble the ball out of bounds in midfield you keep possession.If the ball starts in the field of play and you get tackled in the end zone, you either get a TD or a Safety and then possesion changes. Fumble the ball out of the end zone and possession changes.

Trust me. I understand what the rule is. I know what happens when the ball goes into the endzone. That has nothing to do with this. As your first statement suggests, I was discussing the rationale for the rule.So, the reason the defense gets the ball is because "the endzones have different rules than the midfield?"When they came up with this rule, the rulemakers were contemplating what to do if the ball gets fumbled out of the end zone and the rationale they come up with is "the endzones have different rules than the midfield," so we'll do the opposite of what we do on 83% of the field?

And the rationale is what I wrote.... You get tackled in midfield possesions stays with you. You fumble out of bounds possesion stays with you. You get tackled in the end zone, possesion changes. You fumble out of the end zone, then.... there is your rationale.

That's not the rationale. That's the rule.

 

[trader jake]

The rule that needs to change is the force out rule.

Either the receiver gets both feet in or he doesn't. If the defensive player hits him and this causes the receiver to not get both feet in, great play by the defense, no catch. The judgement rulings on that play are brutal and inconsistent. End the judgement call (that isn't subject to review) and make it a firm rule.

Look at the feet!!!

 

[Captain Spaulding]

The rule that needs to change is the force out rule.Either the receiver gets both feet in or he doesn't. If the defensive player hits him and this causes the receiver to not get both feet in, great play by the defense, no catch. The judgement rulings on that play are brutal and inconsistent. End the judgement call (that isn't subject to review) and make it a firm rule.Look at the feet!!!

That is interesting, the first time I've heard this opinion and I agree with you! The refs and the fans sure would love the rule change. All the offensive pass catchers need to do is not run their routes so close to the sideline (and QB's not throw it so high and wide). Good thinking, perhaps the NFL is already considering this.

 

[cstu]

Team fumbles out of the endzone. Ball is given to the opposition at the 20 yard line.

Why hasn't this rule been changed? I think this is the most inconsistent/unjustified rules in the NFL.

Opposition never recovers the fumble but yet they are granted the ball AND given usually 15-20 yards as a bonus.

How again does this promote "offense" and scoring which is an objective of the NFL. In fact it isn't even a consistent rule. If you fumble out of bounds along the sideline the offense retains ball. If you fumble out of endzone, the other team gets the ball +20 yards. The defense didn't do anything "better" to justify that reward.

Long overdue for a rule change, just my opinion!

Give the ball back to the offense at the spot of the fumble and the lost down just like fumbling out of bounds along the sideline. That should just be a common sense rule change.

So does this mean on kickoffs the team kicking should get the ball back for kicking it beyond the endzone? Same rule, you cant advance a fumble, you also cant fumble in the endzone, therfore if one fumbles and the ball rolls into the endzone (the other teams territory) and out of bounds no matter what the down the opposing team gets the ball. The ball once in the endzone is not possesed, when it rolls out of the endzon it is then possesed by the team who's endzone it rolled out of. The "better" the defense did was cause a fumble or keep the offense from recovering it, and the reward is justified. Should we cahnge the rule about the team who registers the safety getting the ball back too, they already got their reward why get the ball back as well.If the offense loses the ball why should they get it back? Why should they not be penalized for their mistake, or should we just allow for mulligans in football?

Then why does the offense get the ball back if the exact same thing occurs at midfield? Doesn't this rationale apply regardless of where we are on the field?

I don't like the rule but I believe the reasoning is the it's the opponent's "goal" and by losing ball there they automatically take possession of the ball. Personally, I'd like to see fumbling into the endzone be a 15 yard penalty rather than loss of the ball.

 

[bcr8f]

If the ball goes out of bounds in the end zone, where are you going to spot the ball? The 20 makes sense since it's essentially a touchback. If you give the ball back to the offense on, say the 1 yard line, you're encouraging them to do all kind of gimmicky reaching type plays to try and cross the goal line without worrying about losing the ball.All touchbacks result in the team getting the ball on the 20--so that's not inconsistent with the way they treat a fumble out of the end zone.

Except the defense doesn't recover the ball. I'd rather sewe a 5 or 10 penalty rather than losing the ball.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Then why does the offense get the ball back if the exact same thing occurs at midfield? Doesn't this rationale apply regardless of where we are on the field?

Because the endzones have different rules than the midfield. You get tackled in midfield, the ball stays in your possesion in midfield (unless it is 4th down of course). Fumble the ball out of bounds in midfield you keep possession.If the ball starts in the field of play and you get tackled in the end zone, you either get a TD or a Safety and then possesion changes. Fumble the ball out of the end zone and possession changes.

Trust me. I understand what the rule is. I know what happens when the ball goes into the endzone. That has nothing to do with this. As your first statement suggests, I was discussing the rationale for the rule.So, the reason the defense gets the ball is because "the endzones have different rules than the midfield?"When they came up with this rule, the rulemakers were contemplating what to do if the ball gets fumbled out of the end zone and the rationale they come up with is "the endzones have different rules than the midfield," so we'll do the opposite of what we do on 83% of the field?

And the rationale is what I wrote.... You get tackled in midfield possesions stays with you. You fumble out of bounds possesion stays with you. You get tackled in the end zone, possesion changes. You fumble out of the end zone, then.... there is your rationale.

Really? I was under the impression that if you get tackled in the opponent's endzone you get a touchdown (and a 15 yard penalty).When I read the thread title I initially disagreed whole-heartily, but I can see the OP's point now.If you fumble the ball forward out of bounds you get the ball back at the spot of the fumble, right? So why is that different here?

 

[trader jake]

The rule that needs to change is the force out rule.Either the receiver gets both feet in or he doesn't. If the defensive player hits him and this causes the receiver to not get both feet in, great play by the defense, no catch. The judgement rulings on that play are brutal and inconsistent. End the judgement call (that isn't subject to review) and make it a firm rule.Look at the feet!!!

That is interesting, the first time I've heard this opinion and I agree with you! The refs and the fans sure would love the rule change. All the offensive pass catchers need to do is not run their routes so close to the sideline (and QB's not throw it so high and wide). Good thinking, perhaps the NFL is already considering this.

Thanks. I guess even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally.