Why does the NFL continue to use the Tuck Rule? (1 Viewer)

[SeniorVBDStudent]

Even most Patriots fans who laugh at the Raiders for failure to come back from the infamous tuck rule call will tell you this is an insane rule.

This morning on NFL Network, Mike Prereira called it the least liked but most well understood rule in the league.

And yet league officials do nothing about it. Why?

It seems to me that if you simply struck the tuck rule from the rulebook officials could easily determine, with the support of replay as needed, when the "attempt to pass" ends and the "attempt to tuck" begins....

 

[BigRed]

Agree, it's totally moronic. If a QB/player's arm is going forward in an attempted pass and the ball is knocked out, incomplete pass. In ANY other case, fumble. How does this not make sense? In fact, I would even take it a step further and say it's a fumble if a QB/player's arm is going forward in an attempted pass - it's ONLY incomplete if the ball leaves his hand - since isn't that what a PASS is?

 

[KellysHeroes]

its a way for the refs to allow a favorite team to stay in the game.... PERIOD!

 

[Steady Mooobin]

This came up again during the Dallas Game.

I commented to my buddy, all a QB has to do to is pump fake over and over and he'll never be charged with a fumble.

 

[Jeremy]

It seems like an easy way to get around intentional grounding, assuming you have challenges left. When Romo did it the other day he knew right away to call for the challenge flag. I think he did it delibrately to avoid the safety.

What confused me about that one though was it looked like he had his back to the line of scrimmage. Wouldn't that make it a lateral?

 

[DeCleater]

This came up again during the Dallas Game.I commented to my buddy, all a QB has to do to is pump fake over and over and he'll never be charged with a fumble.

Romo got hit a split second after a pump fake and fumbled. I thought it looked exactly the same as Brady when the tuck rule was called. Nobody called the tuck rule last week, it was a fumble.

 

[rick6668]

It seems like an easy way to get around intentional grounding, assuming you have challenges left. When Romo did it the other day he knew right away to call for the challenge flag. I think he did it delibrately to avoid the safety. What confused me about that one though was it looked like he had his back to the line of scrimmage. Wouldn't that make it a lateral?

This is the problem. It should have been a backward pass and a live ball, but the rule says that it has to be an incomplete pass.

 

[AB in DC]

Agree, it's totally moronic. If a QB/player's arm is going forward in an attempted pass and the ball is knocked out, incomplete pass. In ANY other case, fumble. How does this not make sense? In fact, I would even take it a step further and say it's a fumble if a QB/player's arm is going forward in an attempted pass - it's ONLY incomplete if the ball leaves his hand - since isn't that what a PASS is?

I'll make it even easier than that. If the ball moves forward -- from the point when it leaves the player's hand -- it's an incomplete pass. If not, it's a backward pass (or fumble, which comes out to the same thing).

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

I commented to my buddy, all a QB has to do to is pump fake over and over and he'll never be charged with a fumble.

Not even that... I've been saying this since hearing about this asinine rule in the Pats/Raiders game, that all a QB has to do is pump once in his drop back and as long as he doesn't "tuck" the ball away he can never fumble.

 

[footballnerd]

This came up again during the Dallas Game.I commented to my buddy, all a QB has to do to is pump fake over and over and he'll never be charged with a fumble.

Romo got hit a split second after a pump fake and fumbled. I thought it looked exactly the same as Brady when the tuck rule was called. Nobody called the tuck rule last week, it was a fumble.

No Romo had one where he pump faked right before a Card hit him in the chest. He was able to pull the ball down in an attempt to secure the ball to his chest before he got hit, then fumbled it. It wasn't even a pass and they called the tuck rule for him. That was pretty weak, although good for me fantasy wise since I started him.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

This came up again during the Dallas Game.I commented to my buddy, all a QB has to do to is pump fake over and over and he'll never be charged with a fumble.

Romo got hit a split second after a pump fake and fumbled. I thought it looked exactly the same as Brady when the tuck rule was called. Nobody called the tuck rule last week, it was a fumble.

No Romo had one where he pump faked right before a Card hit him in the chest. He was able to pull the ball down in an attempt to secure the ball to his chest before he got hit, then fumbled it. It wasn't even a pass and they called the tuck rule for him. That was pretty weak, although good for me fantasy wise since I started him.

You seem surprised that the tuck rule was invoked because the ball was jarred loose as he attempted to secure the ball after deciding not to pass, but that is the very definition of the (crazy) rule.

 

[Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll]

It's like the guy who can never admit he's wrong.

It's as stupid 'a rule as the knee touching the ground constituting a tackle in college.

 

[daanswr4]

and if it isn't a fumble, why isn't it intentional grounding? clearly in the dallas cardinals game, if romo threw the ball to no one while in the grasp in the endzone as he was it's a safety. i still think it should have been a fumble for a touchdown, but if not, it has to be some penalty or something. instead it's an incomplete pass? why wouldn't you "tuck" every time you're about to be sacked? he never looked like he was getting rid of that ball as a pass. that play just plain pissed me off, especially after having watched romo get sacked and stripped earlier in the game only to have that fumble negated because the refs blew the whistle .4 seconds after docket touched romo. and then there was the penalty at the end of regulation where a cardinals player was hurt and couldn't get off the field and was flagged for offsides? and the skins had lost. if dallas won that game in ot, i was going to LOSE IT. the nfl has to change that rule.

 

[DropKick]

its a way for the refs to allow a favorite team to stay in the game.... PERIOD!

As usual, there is not a thread of intelligence behind this...

 

[DropKick]

It's as stupid 'a rule as the knee touching the ground constituting a tackle in college.

I hope you're joking.

 

[DropKick]

Even most Patriots fans who laugh at the Raiders for failure to come back from the infamous tuck rule call will tell you this is an insane rule.This morning on NFL Network, Mike Prereira called it the least liked but most well understood rule in the league.And yet league officials do nothing about it. Why?It seems to me that if you simply struck the tuck rule from the rulebook officials could easily determine, with the support of replay as needed, when the "attempt to pass" ends and the "attempt to tuck" begins....

I don't think the rule is "insane". Actually, there is some consistency in NFL rules. Favor the offense and scoring, protect the quarterback, eliminate subjectivity.They wanted an objective method of defining the end of the pass attempt. They do not want the official deciding INTENT. Its similar to the elimination of the "push-out" rule. Would the receiver have come down? Too subjective.I never understood the complaining about the infamous ruling. Per the NFL rules, it was the correct call.