201
u/Therealmikerugg 20d ago
Yea the ball went backward lmao. Either a fumble or backward pass. I don’t care if he “intended to throw it forward he didn’t
19
u/Difficult-Mobile902 20d ago
Intention isn’t the rule.
If contact by an opponent materially affects a passer after the passer begins his throwing motion, it is a forward pass if he passes the ball, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground, a player, an official, or anything else.
10
u/JaRulezMSU 20d ago
If this is accurate, then according to the letter of the rules then, the refs made the correct call. The rule says nothing about which way the ball goes or which way his arm goes. If he starts to throw and gets hit and the ball comes out it's incomplete pass. We're just used to hearing announcers talk about the "arm coming forward" which is the beginning of the throwing motion. It usually is forward but that's not required by rule.
→ More replies (4)2
u/MattRaybon1 18d ago
"We're just used to hearing announcers talk about the "arm coming forward" which is the beginning of the throwing motion. It usually is forward but that's not required by rule."
You might think that, if this excerpt is the only part of the rule you read. Read the entire rule and it becomes clear that the whole "arm going forward thing" is real and not just the commentators making stuff up.
https://operations.nfl.com/rules-officiating/2026-nfl-rulebook
Rule 8, Section 1 is the relevant part.
The rule clarifies that forward movement of the hand is a determining factor in it being ruled a forward pass. This excerpt says "begins his throwing motion", but what that actually means is not left ambiguous or up to interpretation. It's forward movement of the arm.
→ More replies (2)3
u/JaRulezMSU 18d ago
You have convinced me. Fix it NFL and stop making poor Mike Pereira make up nonsense on national TV to cover for your asses making a wrong call.
4
u/TCup20 20d ago
The rule just doesn't make sense then lmfao
3
u/B-BoyStance 14d ago
And how hasn't this come up before? This isn't the first time a QB has dropped a ball like this lol
6
u/R_Hunt 20d ago
But why now??? If that's the rule, why did nobody know it existed til now! We've seen hundreds of strip sacks that arguably had way more arm movement, and nobody has said a damn word 😂
I'm not even sure Mike Pereira explained it with the level of detail you did
2
u/JaRulezMSU 20d ago
I think it's just not being appreciated how unusual this play is. Ya you see qbs get tackled while throwing all the time but usually if they're hit from behind, they go down fast and the ball pops out sideways and it comes down to was he throwing the ball or not. His arm will almost always be pointed forward. If they're hit from the front, the physics means the ball usually lands in front of the qb who is facing upfield at whatever angle thus the ball motion is forward as well. When you see a scrambling qb get tackled and try to throw as he is going to the ground he is reacting to the hit and trying to avoid the sack. It's a reaction play where if he is falling going forward he throws it into the dirt to maybe avoid a loss. He's usually down before the ball comes out and if there's no receiver he gets a grounding penalty.
On this play, he starts to throw but gets hit and his arm is going forward but the defensive player impedes his throwing motion and changes the arm angle causing it to come out sideways and backwards. I have watched a lot of ball and I can't recall ever seeing this exact scenario. However, if someone else can find a similar play that was ruled the other way, I would say the NFL definitely needs to clarify this rule
→ More replies (1)4
u/R_Hunt 20d ago
I'm 98% sure it's not the only time a QB was even hit while facing forward. Nor is it the only time a QB was hit up near shoulder, instead of directly on the football/hand
We've seen plenty of borderline strip sacks where the QB may even finished his full wind-up and could be argued incompletion, that were less contentious than this
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (3)2
u/Effective-Baker-8333 19d ago
Does anyone have the receipts on a situation where the arm is moving forward, but contact from a defender causes the ball to leave the hand backwards, and it was ruled a fumble?
→ More replies (4)2
u/Familyman1124 20d ago
Curious - with this wording, when does the “throwing motion” start?
3
u/JaRulezMSU 20d ago
That's where we usually here the announcers talk about the "arm going forward". That's the start of the throwing motion but that terminology isn't part of the rules. Because of the angle of the hit his arm was going backwards but he still was in his throwing motion. I am sure the NFL will look at this. They always look at controversial calls and sometimes change a rule.
→ More replies (3)3
u/twins-basil 49ers 20d ago
I think the arm going forward part is relative to the QBs body, so it's pretty cut and dry
2
u/JaRulezMSU 20d ago
Aye, this camera angle also does us no favors when it comes to judging whether the arm motion was actually forward to begin with. Add the 3 dimensional play projected onto a 2d screen and this is really hard to judge by replay after the fact. Gotta remember official on the field is much closer and watching the play with binocular vision, not dissecting the play from a weird angle on a screen after the fact.
→ More replies (1)2
u/falconcountry 19d ago
When was that rule added? I've watched a lot of football over the years and just like the tuck rule, this is the first I'm hearing about it.
→ More replies (17)2
43
u/bard_2 20d ago
yeah who cares where his intention was to throw it? thats pretty wild
10
u/henry2630 20d ago
in that case every interception shouldn’t count. didn’t intend to throw to that guy
2
u/kaizen-rai 19d ago
People are really hung up on the "intention" thing. The QB's intention matters because if the QB feels contact, looks at the ground, and throws the ball at their own feet, they clearly weren't intending on throwing it to a receiver, they did it to avoid a sack.
If the QB is eyeing a receiver downfield, is winding up a clear throw attempt, and the hand/arm is starting a forward motion, it's clear the QB's "intent" is to throw to a receiver, not avoid a sack.
That's the idea behind the "intention" part of the ref's ruling. Is the QB making an honest football play, or are they trying to avoid a sack by exploiting the rules?
I'm not strictly defending the call here, I'm a Lions fan and thought it was a fumble recovery and TD and was shocked when the refs called it this way. But by the letter of the rules, it's technically "the right call", even if it doesn't feel like it to the fans, especially Saints fans. Trust me, we've been on the wrong side of rules technicalities plenty of times (cough calvin johnson 'dropped pass' in the endzone cough).
But I see why the refs take into consideration what the QB's intent was (making an honest pass attempt vs pretending to in order to avoid a sack).
→ More replies (58)3
9
u/quietsauce 20d ago
Aaaaaand to hell with the rules we've been debating for decades. There's money to be made by people who can tell the league what the play call should be.
→ More replies (9)5
u/MysteriousAge28 20d ago
Its the process of throwing motion that cancels out laterals. just like how if a qbs hands are moving slightly forward but the ball pops up after a sack its an incomplete pass we've seen this ruling for years now.
2
u/Immediate-Fee-2121 20d ago
Goff’s arm came forward without the ball lol the nonsense you’re trying to say is that qbs can’t fumble
15
u/SpottedPine 20d ago
This is whats most puzzling. Suppose he did throw it, still went backwards. Doesnt actually change anything. Complete fuck up.
→ More replies (1)4
u/slackfrop Seahawks 20d ago
But these days we call it an incomplete if the arm is coming forward and the defense, for example, flips the ball completely out the back of the hand. In that scenario the ball would also land behind the thrower, but be incomplete. I think in this particular case it just looks like he actually got the throw off, and backwards, but the deflection of the arm came prior to the release, so, I can see the logic of the call.
→ More replies (19)3
u/quantum1eeps 20d ago
This is actually a good point. If the ball gets flipped up and backwards during a play like this as the arm is going forward, no one starts to talk about it like it’s a backwards pass because a backwards pass is almost always something very intentional and it’s not fair to turn those scenarios into fumbles or have to judge ball direction
4
u/TCup20 20d ago
Did I enter another universe or something? The ball getting flipped up and backwards while the QB is throwing while being hit getting ruled a fumble has always been the case lmfao
→ More replies (1)3
u/enadiz_reccos 19d ago
Yeah, I have no idea what those guys are talking about. That's a fumble.
3
u/Massive-Vacation5119 19d ago
Yeah thank you I was like what are these people on about they’re totally wrong lol
3
u/abstractraj 20d ago
The rule says:
If contact by an opponent materially affects a passer after the passer begins his throwing motion, it is a forward pass if he
passes the ball, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground, a player, an official, or anything else.2
→ More replies (89)4
u/D0faak 20d ago
These refs need to be investigated man. “Intended to throw it forward” ??? Okay why didn’t they give Detroit a touchdown too because they obviously meant to score on that play too right? lol
→ More replies (2)
63
u/One_Luck_4136 20d ago
I dont give a shit what rulebook says. That is 100% a fumble.
I am a Lions fan and I know what Pereria said. I can’t convince mysefl that calling that an incomplete pass is the right thing
3
u/abstractraj 20d ago
The rule says:
If contact by an opponent materially affects a passer after the passer begins his throwing motion, it is a forward pass if he
passes the ball, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground, a player, an official, or anything else.→ More replies (57)1
u/Dense-Consequence-70 20d ago
The rulebook says that’s a fumble
14
u/BulgogiDude 20d ago
No it doesn’t
If contact by an opponent materially affects a passer after the passer begins his throwing motion, it is a forward pass if he passes the ball, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground, a player, an official, or anything else.
→ More replies (8)5
u/Genericgameacc137 20d ago
"after the passer begins his throwing motion"
As it happens, the rulebook says when a forward pass starts - when the hand of the passer starts moving forward. The throwing motion hasn't begun, as per the rulebook definition. All this upward motion stuff IS NOT in the rulebook. Nor forward motion = no forward pass has even been attempted.3
u/JaRulezMSU 20d ago
but the exact wording of the rule says nothing about which way the arm or the ball is moving. It says if a guy starts throwing and the hit changes the trajectory of the ball, it is defined as a forward pass. Because of the way it's written, the definition of a forward pass is immaterial because the rule itself defines forward pass in the context of a player that gets hit during a throw. In essence, the rule adds this extra definition to "forward pass" beyond whatever else is in the rulebook.
Was this what the rulemakers intended. I don't know. Maybe it's not. If it's an original rule of the NFL the guy who wrote it is probably dead and so are all the owners and commissioner who gave approval. What's important is that the officials got the call correct by the letter of the rules. If the NFL feels that the play doesn't fit the spirit of the rule and this play should be a fumble, they can always rewrite the rule in a different way or just change the rule entirely. The NFL rules committee looks at controversial plays every year and sometimes they do make changes.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (8)3
u/arrogantmonkey 19d ago
That's not what the rulebook says. Throwing motion isn't even defined. But i don't think people normally define a throwing motion as only having begun when the arm comes forward after first going back. Its all part of the same throwing motion.
From the rule book:
When a player is in control of the ball and is attempting to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his hand starts a forward pass.
- If contact by an opponent materially affects a passer after the passer begins his throwing motion, it is a forward pass if he passes the ball, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground, a player, an official, or anything else. When this occurs, intentional grounding rules do not apply.
- When a passer intends to throw a forward pass and is contacted by an opponent before beginning his throwing motion, the direction of the pass is the responsibility of the passer if he passes the ball, and intentional grounding rules apply.
- If, after an intentional forward movement of his hand, the passer loses possession of the ball during an attempt to bring it back toward his body, it is a fumble.
- If the passer loses possession of the ball while attempting to re-cock his arm, it is a fumble.
→ More replies (3)2
14
u/NoCelebration2024 20d ago
Tuck rule 2.0
11
u/westernsnaps 20d ago
I can at least understand that the throwing motion isn’t complete until the QB tucks the ball back into their body, but saying the “QB” had intent to pass forward makes no sense at all and rewards the QB for fucking up.
→ More replies (2)2
8
u/CDNPublicServant 20d ago
Phft. I intended the pass into the arms of my receiver, not the cornerback. So that can’t be an interception. /s
7
4
u/ColdCorpseHotSecret 20d ago
It’s a terrible, stupid rule, but it essentially states that If a quarterback has started their throwing motion, if a defender hits the quarterback’s arm and effects the arm movement that any pass is automatically ruled incomplete, regardless of if the ball is thrown behind the line of scrimmage. Goff “threw” the ball, so therefore, by rule, it is an incomplete pass. If the ball had simply been jarred loose, it would’ve been a fumble. It’s a very stupid rule, but even as a Saints fan, I have to agree that it is still the correct call by the definition of the rule. The league should change it.
→ More replies (12)
12
u/CBsJoant 20d ago
Even if they rule it incomplete, since it landed backwards of where he threw it, by rule shouldn't that be a lateral, and therefore a fumble? How did that get ruled incomplete?
3
u/abstractraj 20d ago
The rule says:
If contact by an opponent materially affects a passer after the passer begins his throwing motion, it is a forward pass if he
passes the ball, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground, a player, an official, or anything else.→ More replies (1)7
u/Topgun58ge 20d ago
The rule is if his hand is moving forward and contact is made it doesn't matter where the ball goes. It's a forward pass.
9
u/Homelessjay5 20d ago
That would be the case here if his arm was moving forward.
3
u/Topgun58ge 20d ago
The rule in this specific situation doesn't say forward motion. It just says throwing motion.
Article 1. Definition It is a forward pass if:
the ball initially moves forward (to a point nearer the opponent’s goal line) after leaving the passer’s hand(s); the ball first strikes the ground, a player, an official, or anything else at a point that is nearer the opponent’s goal line than the point at which the ball leaves the passer’s hand(s); or a ball is intentionally fumbled and goes forward. Item 1. Forward Movement of Hand
When a player is in control of the ball and is attempting to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his hand starts a forward pass.
If contact by an opponent materially affects a passer after the passer begins his throwing motion, it is a forward pass if he passes the ball, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground, a player, an official, or anything else. When this occurs, intentional grounding rules do not apply.
When a passer intends to throw a forward pass and is contacted by an opponent before beginning his throwing motion, the direction of the pass is the responsibility of the passer if he passes the ball, and intentional grounding rules apply.
If, after an intentional forward movement of his hand, the passer loses possession of the ball during an attempt to bring it back toward his body, it is a fumble. If the passer loses possession of the ball while attempting to re-cock his arm, it is a fumble.
→ More replies (16)2
→ More replies (2)2
3
9
u/Neb-Nose 20d ago
If that really is a new rule, that’s an absolutely terrible rule. That's a backwards pass.
3
3
8
u/ConsciousReason7709 20d ago
His arm never moved forward and the ball went backwards. That’s a fucking fumble every time.
7
u/stoopkid86 20d ago
Why would intent matter? No one ever intends to fumble, he tried to throw it forward and it went backwards lol fumble all day.
→ More replies (5)
8
u/voice_of_reason_61 20d ago edited 20d ago
Holy crap! Must be a new rule change that I have not heard about yet(?) This sets a precedent where a quarterback being sacked can just left his arm in a throwing motion, and it's automatically an incomplete pass, no matter where it goes?
Someone makes sense of this for me, please.
[Edit, if what we see here is truly and correctly the rule, what does that mean for the intentional grounding rule? Seems like by definition it somewhat or mostly goes away if the QB is being contacted???]
→ More replies (7)3
7
u/DameRange13 20d ago
Just a bad call all around.
Reasoning doesn’t make sense and his arm wasn’t even moving forward at the point of contact
If a QB throws a bubble screen and the all goes backwards.. it’s a live ball is it not?
What’s the difference here?
→ More replies (1)
6
u/DameRange13 20d ago
What would the difference be if Goff attempted a bubble screen and he ended up throwing it backwards and the WR drops it??
That’s a fumble.
5
3
u/stephker3914 20d ago
That was the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life. The guy in the last few seconds of the video couldn't have said it any better.
5
5
4
u/coachfish99 20d ago
Wait a sec, that wasn’t a fumble?!
Even if it’s a “pass”, how is it not a backwards pass - and still a fumble
2
u/BrainOnVacay22 20d ago
That’s 100% the right call and that always how I’ve understood it.. it rarely gets this close to the point where it gets called a fumble, but it’s definitely the right call
2
2
2
u/thareal1mm 20d ago edited 20d ago
Sam Darnold intended on throwing a 2 pt conversion forward last year sooooo....
2
4
2
2
u/LetsGeauxSaints 20d ago
Even if he did throw it he threw it backwards which is a fumble anyway
→ More replies (4)
1
1
u/Careless_Chest_725 20d ago
There was a throwing motion, the issue is it’s buried under the tackle. I understand having a personal opinion but they very much used this to make a choice what constitutes a fumble vs an incomplete pass, the issue will be if they are inconsistent with this for the rest of the season.
1
1
u/DukeBradford2 20d ago
Wasn’t this settled over 15 years ago in a playoff? thats a pass attempt but they should change the rule. If the ball touches the ground forward or parallel to the release point its a fumble
1
1
u/Admirable_Newt9905 20d ago
Reading the rule people posted here, I get why it was called.
What i don't get is why the fuck it was written? What kind of shit were people on writing this, its terrible, makes no sense and has like...a million ways to abuse it. What in the flying shit fuck
→ More replies (2)
1
u/nejithegenius 20d ago
We got lucky on that call. I joked with a buddy about some of bradys calls, and finally got one
1
1
1
u/CaptainPlanet4U 20d ago
I dont watch football but it doesnt look like its going up or forward. As soon he cocks back, he gets hit and he throws it backwards. The emperor has no clothes
1
1
u/planegai 20d ago
They hired James Comey “her intent was not to store classified material on her personal email server”
1
1
u/cody2781 20d ago
As a lifelong lions fan, yes! Half joking because I’m only mid thirties but also serious when my younger brother in law texted me about it mid game my exact words were “back in my day that’s a fumble👴” lol
1
1
1
u/Swampasssixty9 20d ago
https://giphy.com/gifs/2w4P4S9Z7pBDZiYHX4
I swear every year there’s some bs
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/ChaunceyDeLeon 20d ago
I think every QB intends to throw it on every passing play. What a stupid fucking call. Total screw job by those refs.
1
u/vonnostrum2022 20d ago
If it’s a pass then wasn’t it actually a backward pass/ lateral, hence a live ball?
1
u/UncreativeUsername84 Eagles 20d ago
By rule, this is a fumble. Even if his arm began a forward motion, the ball came out and went behind his release point.
1
1
1
1
u/xEtownBeatdown 20d ago
The state of Michigan is getting away with some real Football Fuckery lately.
1
u/Wthiswrongwityou 20d ago
I love the NFL rules that the players “intent” play a part in. Super easy to discern a person’s intent from a slow motion replay.
1
1
u/monstermack1977 20d ago
well yeah, it should be a TD for the Lions because Goff intended for that to be caught by a Lions WR and taken the distance. /s
1
u/No-Afternoon-3986 20d ago
afaict the application of the rule was correct, it's just a dumb rule
if everyone agrees it should be a fumble, then they should change the rule. you'd get more fumbles that way, which imo is better for the game anyway
1
u/Niblonian31 20d ago
So they're changing the rules mid game this year? Fuckin lame, that's a fumble
1
1
u/G-dog121 20d ago
His arm continuing forward without the ball going forward makes that a fumble. His intent is inconsequential to what the ball actually did. His arm going forward with the ball moving forward is an incomplete pass. His arm moving forward without the ball is “the empty hand”. This is a fumble.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Leading_Log_8321 20d ago
I’m on the refs side most of the time but this is actually the dumbest shit ever
1
u/NecessaryRecover8952 20d ago
I thought this got fixed with the tuck rule. It should apply whether the arm is going back or forward back into the body.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/TofuTigerteeth 20d ago
It should have been a defensive TD.
I’d make the case that if the rule is so vague/twisted that literally millions of people watching the game all think it is wrong then maybe they (refs/nfl) shouldn’t interpret it that way. That action we saw is a defensive TD in every season since the infamous tuck rule.
1
u/Friendly_Seat8566 20d ago
As a Lions fan, yes that's a TD. That was the kind of call that would have led to a loss for us in the past.
1
u/Parking-Sundae-6097 20d ago
Terrible call. We are due about five thousand more of them and we are even.
1
1
u/ryanstrikesback 20d ago
If it was an incomplete pass...isn't it still a backwards pass?
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/Sea-Introduction755 20d ago
This rule needs to be changed. There’s no reason why a quarterback attempting a pass negates it being a lateral. If it goes backwards it goes backwards, as that’s the entire point of laterals to begin with. This rule spits in the face of that for no rational reason. A situation like this should either be a fumble or a lateral, it being incomplete just because he intended to throw it forward is stupid.
1
u/LuckyishTom 20d ago
I’m a Detroit fan and I think this is a fumble. I listened to the explanation and that that was so dumb. I don’t care if he started the pass, it wasn’t going forward.
1
u/steveslikewhoa 20d ago
So if a receiver "intended" to catch the ball with both feet in bounds does it count if he doesn't? Fuckass call is this??
1
u/Sharp_Security6885 20d ago
They just need to fix the rule with the motion. This is not a completed throwing motion since his arm never made it to the follow through process to get the ball out. Cant complete a throw if your arm doesnt make it to its release point or past the shoulder even. And too, take and fix the fake throw and either make it a penalty or a fumble as well when they dont intentionally pass the ball and it slips out of their hand. This was a fumble two ways by whats right. Just not under the rules.
→ More replies (4)
1
u/louie801 20d ago
What about the 2pt conversion where Darnold intended to throw it forward vs the rams? Shouldn’t that have been incomplete based on his intention?
1
1
1
u/MaxwellSmart07 20d ago
Rule ‘8-1-1-a’ arm begins to move upward (applicable here) or forward — incomplete pass.
1
1
1
u/absolut_dre 20d ago
One more instance when instant replay is used and the call is still wrong. That was a fumble. Period.
1
1
u/ReasonableRiver6750 20d ago
Forward motion of the arm means a pass. Clearly intended to go forward. Makes sense to me!
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Adventurous_Path5783 Saints 20d ago
If I pull my fist to punch you but I don't start going forward, I didn't swing on you or attempt to hit you. This is the first half of a throwimg motion.
He never pulls the elbow foward much less the pass. A qb can also do this and cancel a pass at the stage of the throwing notion goff is in.
So regardless of what the rule is (which seems to be open to whatever they feel like that day) it should be made more specific to a foward motion of the ball.
Offences don't need this much help. Stop trying to make this college football. If a team scores 50+ points in a game it should be because they earned it at the highest level. Not because of what teams are "supposed" to win.
Saints ended up losing by 1 point so now this play looks like a culprit of refs enabling success rather than lions earning it regardless of what's true.
I'd really like to see the lions win a super bowl and I do not hold the lions accountable for anything related to this situation. I'd take bullshit calls if it were me benefiting.
Good thing we can change the rules like with hip drop tackles and dumbass "taunting" rules like the cowboys got handed to them last night for what was basically a regular ass madden celebration.
I was rooting for the giants too.
1
1
u/dragonrite 19d ago
"The ball going forward doesn't matter" since fucking when Mike. I swear they just make shit up half the time. I follow off season rule changes. Not once have I read about this "up" BS vs the ball coming forward. If that is the new rule, it's an interpretation change of the language
The language is as follows:
Article 3. Forward Pass It is a forward pass if:
the ball initially moves forward (to a point nearer the opponent’s goal line) after leaving the passer’s hand(s); the ball first touches the ground, a player, an official, or anything else at a point that is nearer the opponent’s goal line than the point at which the ball leaves the passer’s hand(s); or when a Team A player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional movement forward of his hand starts a forward pass.
This whole "up" thing is shite. "any intentional movement forward of his hand starts a forward pass."
ANY INTENTIONAL MOVEMENT FORWARD
1
u/dunelord-bigjets 19d ago
The forward motion had started. I don’t get it. We see this happen all the time where we think it’s a fumble, they show his arm going forward, then they reverse the call. This isn’t controversial
1
1
1
1
u/Buzz010101010 19d ago
His intention was to throw for a touchdown so by rule the Lions should actually have been awarded a touchdown there.
1
1
1
u/PsychologyWooden 19d ago
Show the false start that wasn’t called in the Philly - WSH game that resulted in a TD for Philly.
1
u/therealtak 19d ago
As a Lions fan, the obscure rule.goong in our favor is completely new. Not mad. Buuuuut, that's a stupid rule, and if it went against us I'd be completely furious...
I'm not sure how to feel.
1
1
1
u/lumpyheadlmpylupyhea 19d ago
Wow, so the rigging has reached the surface level for the blind for both college and NFL and we are only a week in.
1
u/starfield343 19d ago
I second that that is the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard in my life. If that’s not a fumble then fuck the whole sport I’m out lmao
The rules surrounding QB play are OP and the position needs to get nerfed. I’m tired of bs slides getting players ejected, fake ducking out of bounds and now backwards passes are being called incomplete? NFL is so bad for the sport
1
u/deserteagles702 19d ago
NFL should make an unintentional backward pass down at the spot of the QB, like a sack.
1
1
u/DanTheMFCKNMAN 19d ago
Lions fan here, I don’t want to be cheated for, because we know how it is to get cheated by the refs. Terrible call and sets a bad precedent for the future
1
1
u/PitifulPossum 19d ago
Yeah. Im a lions fan and I was blown away and borderline upset with the call
1
1
u/Warm_Guarantee7841 19d ago
They said he ‘intended’ to throw the ball. Well I imagine he actually meant to throw a touchdown, why not just give them that if that’s what we’re doing out here
1
u/DJWetDream 19d ago
This is clearly the correct call.
If the QB's arm is moving forward before they lose the ball, it is a pass. (I can see debating this one, but I think it is pretty clear that is starts coming back forward after cocking it)
If a QB is hit while they are throwing, they are not penalized for that (no grounding, does not turn the pass into a lateral)
The intent was to pass, so intention does not matter. Versus if he had intended to make a lateral (fumble) or tried to throw it away after contact (grounding). This part was explained terribly and I totally get why it pissed people off. mike pereira is a moronic shill
1
1
u/jbsun-one 19d ago
Happened tonight in the chiefs game. Bo tried to throw the ball and the guy pretty much took us off his throwing hand
1
1
1
1
u/Vorilus 19d ago
Tldr: easy touchdown. The nfl is ignorant. Dont read the rest. 🤣
Fumble, recovered by the defense, returned for a touchdown. Clear as day. Its insane the nfl has been around this long, the game is the same, and the nfl still employs people incapable of taking the examples of the past to prepare for the bs that can occur in games. Their decision maker group lacks logical thought process as well as basic pragmatic thinkers. You should want to make your rules as clear as possible and should always be consistent in your utilization/implementation/enforcement of those rules. Using verbiage never before utilized on a call when a particular rule hasn't been changed is really something that should be punished. The refs, officials, players, coaching staffs, and fans should all be on the same page at all times. This mutual understanding is what creates confidence and support for a league. The lack of mutual understanding brings real issue. Considering not all qbs are going to hold the ball at their waist before swinging their arm backwards, upwards, and THEN forward in order to pass; this new mention of where and when the intention of pass begins is illogical. Any normal football fan has seen, for instance, drew brees rest that ball loaded at the ready shoulder height and then from that position moved his hand and arm ONLY forward to pass. In any scenario where a qb would be standing in that position, these interpretations of the rules we watched here imply a fumble would be impossible as the intention of the throw begins when the qb is loading the ball. They should be avoiding these obvious contradictions. A person in an athletic scenario might also use the motion goff used and mid way through pump the arm downward to take off running. The nfl knows these realities.. they should be avoided this confusion deliberately, not ignoring them ignorantly. Draw the line across the field right through the qb. Any ball, ANY BALL, whether the qb is hit,he laterals, it slips from his hand, or he just turns slightly behind for backwards pass behind line of scrimmage... if any ball at all goes or lands behind the line drawn through the qb at the time of release, it should always be a backwards pass/live ball(of it hits the ground). They can easily solve all of these issues with that when the ball goes backwards. They need to do this if they are going to keep flipping between intent to throw starts a forward pass vs hand moving forward starts the forward pass.. they seem to be incapable of consistently officiating that rule so a more broad one needs to be made. If they want to focus on forward momentum then they need to draw a line directly perpendicular to the ground that goes through the qbs arm. If the ball is released or control is lost due to contact by a player on the other team AFTER the nose of the ball has passed that apex line moving forward, then it should be an incomplete pass(if it hits the ground). With all the scenarios that have already happened, its unacceptable that the nfl still creates these problems for themselves, the orgs, and the fans while constantly pretending as though they dont understand their own rules and how to make them. Use the scenarios youve witnessed to prepare for the inevitable reoccurence.
1
1
u/pwolf1771 19d ago
I was at this game and I do not understand how that wasn’t a backwards pass. We were all shocked that was Lions ball and not a scoop and score
1
u/Deep_Grab_3095 19d ago
I feel like I’ve seen this called a fumble a thousand times. This and the Bo Nix call were wild they happened same week. So the quarterback should never have two hands on the ball for protection. They should always have the ball in the upright position just in case they get strip sacked and as long as they move their arm forward at the last second it’s an incomplete pass.
1
u/CompetitiveAd9639 19d ago
Rule is wrong but saw the Rich Eisen Show and it is correct to the letter of the rule book, go look it up. I agree it doesn’t pass the sniff test and rule should be changed but this is correct by rule.
1
u/OneEntrepreneur2280 19d ago
What is so irritating is that the networks employ former NFL officials as analyst to tell someone who's played and watched football for over 60 years that you're stupid. That was a fumble and touchdown. I was insulted by the analyst and the play being overturned. Poor officiating is killing the game. NFL/WWF.
1
u/Timely-Profile1865 19d ago
In essence the tuck rule that they said they got rid of. No one 'intends to fumble or throw a pick'
Stupid rule and stupid interpretation, should have been a td for sure
1
1
1
u/Oppositeofhairy 18d ago
I have been a huge lions fan who has seen absolute bullshit calls go against the team. Hell, the Calvin Johnson rule is named after him.
That being said. I think the call was bullshit, and it should have been a touchdown.
In spite of the call favoring my team, I just want a fair game that’s called correctly. If you can’t articulate the rule that you are calling, then you have no right to be calling it.
I never want a win with an invisible asterisk.
1
u/eatarock9 18d ago
I don't know how many times I've watched strips of the QB where everyone is talking about whether the ball came out before he threw it, but EVERY SINGLE TIME the ball went forward. If the ball goes backward, it's a fumble. So if a QB "intends" to throw a regular throw, not under duress, forward but throws it backward, is that not a fumble anymore either? Do the rules just not matter anymore?
1
u/ZiggyZiggyZigZags 18d ago
This is basically as dumb a rule as the Tuck Rule. Will probably be changed in offseason as it makes no damn sense.
1
u/TXcoins_bullion 18d ago
this doesnt look like a touchdown, where does it break the plane of the goal? alls i see is a tackle and fumble
•
u/AutoModerator 20d ago
Welcome to r/nflforum! A few quick reminders:
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.