Illegal forward pass?

[xMRogers]

Any ball that is 'fumbled' forward is not an illegal forward pass.

In your example if a player is all alone and is running downfield just drops the ball forward....you are correct, I would think that would also be ruled an illegal forward pass as long as the ball moves forward.

 

 

 

This part isn't accurate - Mike Vick does it all the time (ok, maybe a few times) where he knees the ball out of his own hand or just drops it forward. They do make a judgement on intent - and you can't intentially fumble/pitch/spike/drop/whatever the ball forward as an offensive player unless you are behing the line of scrimmage and there hasn't already been a fwd pass. If you do all but roll it, will be looked at as a pass/lateral and judged as an illegal fwd pass. If you roll it, will be ruled on the fumblerooski ruling (but not be allowed). If you spike it 20 yds downfield after making a diving catch and nto being touched, you'll be lauged at, humiliated, and generally thought of as a horses ass...and it'll be an illegal fwd pass.

 

However, same scenario, but as Jackson stands up he get's absolutely hammered and the ball spikes out of his hand going forward as he falls lifeless to the turf...fumble and live ball (and to bring plax into the mix on a diff play, it can roll into the endzone than be jumped on by your team for a TD...as happened in Eagles-Giants earlier this year)

[xMRogers]

Would the 10 second clock runoff rule apply as for other penalties occuring in hurry-up plays within the last 2 minutes?

 

 

 

Yes, but I've always wondered why they don't teach this :

 

if you are within 5 yds of the sideline and looks like you got no shot to get TD/first down/out of bounds/play over before time expires...whatever - why not fire it out of bounds on a lateral (or slightly backwards) - I've just seen a lot of guys that were trying to get out to stop the clock cause time was winding down end of half/game, and they had to know it wasn't going to happen since three guys were converging but they just went down - just pitch it out.

 

Heck, even in a "need 70 yds, no TO, 13 secs left" sort of scenario - throw it 35 to middle of field as no one will be there on defense, then turn and throw it out of bounds - yea, maybe you lose 5 yds on the backwards lateral, but whatever - got a much better shot now at getting 2nd play into the EZ

[kcmast]

Yes, but I've always wondered why they don't teach this :

 

if you are within 5 yds of the sideline and looks like you got no shot to get TD/first down/out of bounds/play over before time expires...whatever - why not fire it out of bounds on a lateral (or slightly backwards) - I've just seen a lot of guys that were trying to get out to stop the clock cause time was winding down end of half/game, and they had to know it wasn't going to happen since three guys were converging but they just went down - just pitch it out.

 

Heck, even in a "need 70 yds, no TO, 13 secs left" sort of scenario - throw it 35 to middle of field as no one will be there on defense, then turn and throw it out of bounds - yea, maybe you lose 5 yds on the backwards lateral, but whatever - got a much better shot now at getting 2nd play into the EZ

 

Seems logical to me

[Easy n Dirty]

Seems logical to me

 

 

 

Yeah, me too, but I gotta' believe there's a rule that covers this and prevents it from working as easily as the original post explained. If schmucks like us are talking about it on this message baord, it's a certainty that guys like Belichick and Shanahan have thought of it too.

[Gunther]

Let me refresh your memory. Holy Roller! That is why this happened. Payback is a .........

 

Holy Roller, Immaculate Deception, etc. Vincent Jackson was just very lucky he attempted to spike the ball forward, instead of backward.

 

It was obvious he was not trying to make a forward pass, but it was a fourth down play and it was tossed forward to spin the ball, but the rule is what it is. I mean, it is not a penalty subject to the judgment of the officials, correct?

 

edit: Meh...this has been hashed, and re-hashed, in this thread. Should have read the entire thread before responding...

Edited November 27, 2006 by Gunther

[Chargerz]

Let me refresh your memory. Holy Roller! That is why this happened. Payback is a .........

 

Exactly! What goes around.....

[CaGamblers]

I hate the Raiders with a passion, but that was a fumble. They got screwed, not to say Granny doesn't deserve it for screwing Irwindale, Shanny and anyone else that was ever in his employment.

[The Vatican Hitsquad]

Exactly! What goes around.....

 

If this makes you feel better for one of the most historic plays in NFL history, then I'll accept it and stop complaining. Afterall, a Charger fan has to have SOMETHING to hold on to besides neverending hope each preseason!

[Chargerz]

If this makes you feel better for one of the most historic plays in NFL history, then I'll accept it and stop complaining. Afterall, a Charger fan has to have SOMETHING to hold on to besides neverending hope each preseason!

 

I've waited a LONG time for this moment!

[LosGatosEnFuegos]

I read through the "digest of rules" on nfl.com. It's a guide, not a substitute for the actual rulebook, but in lieu of the book it's the best I can do.

 

Under "Fumbles" a fumble is defined as "the loss of player possession of the ball." From this definition, the word "loss" implies the player's forfeiture of possession being unintentional. Loss is defined as the detriment of "failure to keep, have, or get." Failure implies an attempt to maintain possession which was not seen through to fruition.

 

Mr. Moron's play of thowing the ball would not meet this description. He willfully released possession of the ball. Since the ball travelled forward, the ruling of it as a forward pass was the only way to interpret it. This interpretation is strengthened by the fact that the ball was thrown and not simply dropped.

 

In the digest (it is noted that order of rules has been maintained from the official rulebook), the rule of a second forward pass resulting in a five yard penalty precedes the rule of a forward pass beyond the line of scrimmage resulting in loss of down and a five yard penalty. Thus the legality of the forward pass would be contested by the second forward pass rule before the beyond the line of scrimmage rule came into consideration. Since it was illegal under that rule, the appropriate penalty was enforced.

 

This is the best i could do to argue in favor of the refs' call. I almost have myself convinced.

[Chargerz]

I read through the "digest of rules" on nfl.com. It's a guide, not a substitute for the actual rulebook, but in lieu of the book it's the best I can do.

 

Under "Fumbles" a fumble is defined as "the loss of player possession of the ball." From this definition, the word "loss" implies the player's forfeiture of possession being unintentional. Loss is defined as the detriment of "failure to keep, have, or get." Failure implies an attempt to maintain possession which was not seen through to fruition.

 

Mr. Moron's play of thowing the ball would not meet this description. He willfully released possession of the ball. Since the ball travelled forward, the ruling of it as a forward pass was the only way to interpret it. This interpretation is strengthened by the fact that the ball was thrown and not simply dropped.

 

In the digest (it is noted that order of rules has been maintained from the official rulebook), the rule of a second forward pass resulting in a five yard penalty precedes the rule of a forward pass beyond the line of scrimmage resulting in loss of down and a five yard penalty. Thus the legality of the forward pass would be contested by the second forward pass rule before the beyond the line of scrimmage rule came into consideration. Since it was illegal under that rule, the appropriate penalty was enforced.

 

This is the best i could do to argue in favor of the refs' call. I almost have myself convinced.

 

Makes sense to me!

[The Vatican Hitsquad]

Makes sense to me!

 

I ... I ... I promised that i would never complain of this play again.

[Bronco Billy]

Here's the league's CYA interpretation of the play:

 

Rule 8, Article 2 of the NFL rulebook:

 

If a runner intentionally fumbles forward, it is a forward pass.

 

Unfortunately, what they refuse to admit that they comprehend is that Jackson had no intention of fumbling the football, forward or otherwise. Again, the intent comes into play, and while Jackson did intentionally surrendered possession of the football, he had no intent to fumble - with intent being gaged as an effort to gain yardage or stop the clock with the act of fumbling.

 

Another dollop of BS from the league office to cover a critical blown call.

 

Here's the simple test for whether the fumble was intentional: Is it reasonable to think that Jackson knew he was fumbling the football?

Edited November 28, 2006 by Bronco Billy

[Sox]

They should have at least called him for intentional grounding.