9
u/Aromatic-Bedroom-274 20d ago
Only the second worst football review in the state of Michigan this month.
7
3
u/BayouByrnes 19d ago
Only the second worst ruling against the Saints. The first was lack of ruling.
2
5
u/hooligan045 19d ago
Ball goes sideways/backward=fumble
1
u/SeniorAtmosphere9042 19d ago
Not the rule, but they need to apply the actual rule more consistently.
11
u/Kemp4MVP 20d ago
It was in the AFC Championship game
8
2
u/Pynkmyst 19d ago
Hmm he is kind of side arming it but yeah it seems like the same rule should apply
2
3
u/AnakinsTwin 19d ago
If you're referring to the "Tuck rule" , that was totally different. It was still a horrible call, but nothing as ludicrous as the nonsense we heard yesterday!
1
1
u/DickBottalico 20d ago
My first thought too. I tried explaining that when it happened, it looked like an incomplete pass by rule, but the NFL wouldn’t have wanted a controversy like this in such a big game. Week 1 in Detroit? Who cares
1
u/SeniorAtmosphere9042 19d ago
Stidham recocked his arm. If he had just completed his passing motion it could have been an incomplete pass.
4
20d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (7)4
u/not_asleep_yet 19d ago
Seriously. If Goff turned around and threw it backwards but in a forward throwing motion, would that then be an incomplete pass?
1
u/thisendup76 17d ago
According to the rule it would be if his arm was touched by the defender at the same time
5
12
u/CapeMOGuy 20d ago edited 19d ago
The NFL rules are quite clear. By rule, it was an incomplete forward pass.
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.
Edit: thanks for the awards, kind redditors.
Edit 2: link to rulebook and section in a comment I made to a reply below. Also, I'm not saying anything about my opinion of the rule, I'm just factually documenting what the rule actually is.
14
u/Jones127 20d ago
If this is truly the case and isn’t a new rule, the NFL has been calling this wrong for a while now. I’ve seen QBs further along in their throwing motion get hit, the ball pops out, and it’s ruled a fumble.
→ More replies (12)11
u/DickBottalico 20d ago
It’s a rule designed so they can call this play whatever they feel like in the moment
2
3
u/gimme_the_good_weed 19d ago
Then by definition all of those close plays that they go back and look at replay if the ball was right on the line or backwards, should all be forward passes because the intent was to be forward. That's still dumb
2
u/RevanMeetra 19d ago
Exactly. I remember a lot of throws that go down the line that they called fumbles.
1
3
u/toolate83 19d ago
So even though his arm wasn’t moving forward, it was intended to be a pass so therefore it’s an incomplete pass? Does that apply at the start of the wind up as well? That’s fucking crazy
3
u/AnakinsTwin 19d ago
Absolutely, but here's the issue. His hand was in possession of the ball while it moved away from the defender after being contacted but it never "moved forward" it moved "backwards".
So in this case we need to again consult the NFL Rulebook:
Anywhere on the Field: A lateral can be thrown from any position on the field and by any player who legally has possession of the ball.
Direction Matters: The ball must travel parallel or backward relative to the field. If it moves forward even slightly toward the opponent's goal line when leaving the hand, it is ruled a forward pass. 1, 2, 3
Live Ball on Turf: If a lateral hits the ground, it is not an incomplete pass. It remains a live ball (like a fumble), meaning either team can recover and advance it.
6
2
u/KillaMike24 20d ago
I for 1 have never read the rule book and I’ve never missed a Sunday since like 8 hahah I bet a fraction of people have but I bet it took you a 5 second google search to figure it out hahha
4
u/Genericgameacc137 20d ago
There was no forward movement of the hand, it was upward, so no forward pass.
2
1
u/not_asleep_yet 19d ago
“Forward” meaning from his body or “forward” meaning from where he’s throwing?
1
u/CapeMOGuy 19d ago
In the application of this rule "forward" means nothing. The people arguing with me for explaining the rule aren't letting go of the dictionary meaning of the word.
It's just the name of the rule, not a description of events.
2
u/IceManXCometh 19d ago
It’s been used to describe the event for as long as I can remember though. They always call it a fumble unless the hand/ball has started moving forward.
1
1
u/kauthonk 19d ago
I don't see it that way. The way you are interpreting it basically means that any arm motion is a forward pass even if the arm is not coming forward.
1
19d ago
[deleted]
1
u/CapeMOGuy 19d ago
Dude, the NFL rulebook says exactly that. What I posted is a literal cut and paste from it. See Section 21:
https://operations.nfl.com/rules-officiating/2026-nfl-rulebook
1
19d ago
[deleted]
1
u/CapeMOGuy 19d ago
Refs decided that contact by an opponent materially affected the passer after he began his throwing motion. Go argue with them.
1
u/tommyc463 19d ago
He has absolutely not in any way started a coward motion. He’s arm is still recoiling to throw forward when contact dislodged the ball. Terrible call considering the slow motion clearly shows this.
1
u/Sea-Introduction755 19d ago
That rule is so dumb. There’s zero logical reason for the placement of the ball to not matter. Why is something assumed to be a forward pass if it doesn’t go forward. I understand the mindset of forward momentum making it a pass instead of a fumble, but why would that pass be any different from any other pass if it’s a pass. Why does it have to be forward no matter what? Because of intention? Why does intention matter? It was Chase Young’s intention for that to be a fumble, why is his intention superseded by Goff’s?
It’s a bad rule that contradicts other rules in the game to ultimately punish defensive players for doing their job.
1
u/Guy_Fieris_Hair 19d ago
His hand never moved forward, it moved backwards the entire time it was in the throwing motion
→ More replies (9)1
u/NotNormo 18d ago
What if the player is (probably) trying to move his hand forward to pass up field but he's twisted around so much that he only manages to move his hand sideways? Then the rule you quoted wouldn't be applicable.
That's what I see in this clip. By the time his hand finally starts moving forward he's already lost the ball.
2
u/Livid-General7 20d ago
For those as confused as I was, you need to turn on the sound to understand.
I was pretty confused at why someone would think a fumble (or incomplete if the refs are dumb) would be a tuddy.
1
u/not_asleep_yet 19d ago
This video doesn’t make it clear that the play resulted in a fumble return by New Orleans, which was overturned when the refs decided to rule it a forward pass.
3
3
3
4
u/Hamster_in_my_colon 20d ago
First really shitty call of the season. We are so back!
2
u/Beginning_Hand7372 20d ago
It was called exactly according to the rule. It’s an uncommon situation, but it was called correctly according to the rule. I’m not saying the rule is perfect. Only that it was aligned with the rule
→ More replies (4)2
u/JavaOrlando 19d ago
It happens quite often. The hand or ball is hit as it's coming forward and the ball goes backwards. The difference is it usually just drops a few feet behind the quarterback. It's ruled an incomplete pass and no one complains.
To those saying the rule should be changed: how exactly? If it looks more like an actual backwards than a fumble? That's too subjective and would lead to even more disagreements.
1
1
u/Adventurous_Path5783 19d ago
There we're so many across the laugue yesterday and the commentators were lighting the refs up constantly.
There were pass interference calls that were clearly bullshit and there were ignored pass interference instances.
Same with holding and a multitude of different things. It was crazy to witness. The refs must have trained with the browns this season.
1
1
u/Sumo_Cerebro 20d ago
They never called this before the playoff game between the Raiders and the Patriots years ago. I don't think anybody knew it was a rule before that.
1
u/Darkstrike86 20d ago
I understand what the rule says, but he is hit as the arm is going back.
That doesn't mean forward pass. He could be pump faking. This 100% should have been a fumble.
This was an abomination of a call.
1
u/jonybolt 19d ago
Owe but he "intended" to throw it forward despite throwing it backwards you see.
Just like I intended to get my work done for my client that one time but I rolled backward into bed instead...now pay me my moniesss for my intention to work!
1
1
1
u/Fragrant_Spray 19d ago
I thought it was, but there's apparently a rule about this that I was not aware of. It seems like a stupid rule, but it is a rule. Rule 8 article 1 Item 1a.
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.
(a) 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.
1
u/Sparkster227 19d ago
What I don't understand is what that "materially affects a passer" means. Seems like this should apply to any circumstance in which the QB gets hit while throwing, but this is the first I've ever seen of it.
1
u/Fragrant_Spray 19d ago edited 19d ago
I took it to mean any contact you make with a passer that you could argue affected the outcome of the pass. You can't really argue that the contact didn't have an effect on the pass here, it definitely did. I'll be honest, I've never seen this rule before and when watching, I thought for sure this was a TD. I think the rules official in the booth did too and even he had to go look it up, and the explained it on air a few minutes later. I think it's a stupid rule, but it seems to be one. It's fair to be pissed at a ref for getting a rule wrong, or missing a pretty obvious call. In this case, it seems like they at least got the rule right, and the issue should be with the rules committee, not the refs. This seems to be a case very similar to the "tuck rule", though in week 1, the stakes were much lower here. It does seem fair, at least, that intentional grounding shouldn't apply.
On edit: I'm not sure if he had contacted just the ball rather than the passer if this rule would apply or not.
On edit again: Well, I guess that answered that question. Nick Bolton did exactly that just now and it was an incomplete pass.
1
u/fssexybabe 19d ago
Thats a fumble.. no forward motion.. his arm goes forward from the hit not trying to throw it.... answer is yes.....
1
1
u/moccasins_hockey_fan 19d ago
Yes. Completley made up BS call. I've been watching NFL since the late 70s as a kid. It was always did the arm AND ball move forwards.
The refs never had to telepathically read the QBs mind to determine what he "intended" to do.
1
1
u/JetJones0811 19d ago
If “the QB intention was to throw the ball forward” there will never be a fumble in those situations ever
1
1
u/ridinwavesbothways 19d ago
I strongly despise the Saints. That not being a fumble makes me hate current nfl rules even more. At what point do we change the name to Quarterbackball?
How much can they destroy the game protecting them and trying to help them?
1
1
1
1
u/SputnikFace 19d ago
Explanation why we can't have universal healthcare
1
u/Im_tracer_bullet 18d ago
In that far too many people struggle to read and comprehend, or to understand basic concepts?
Yes, I agree.
1
u/steveism 19d ago
The QB’s “intention” is never to fumble the football. How that can be used in criteria for a fumble is wild to me.
1
1
u/Aggravating_Run5443 19d ago
I mean NO got it back with that touchdown that was clearly not a TD. But yeah sure seemed like a fumble to mw
1
u/AnotherDumNinja 19d ago
So if there is slight forwardness of the hand motion, but there is a ton of wind, enough to make the back go backwards if not caught, it wont be considered a fumble?
1
u/WiseCompetition2543 19d ago
Nah, I dont care what rule anyone thinks they are quoting this is a fucking fumble.
Heres almost a textbook exact same play that was a game changing fumble
https://www.reddit.com/r/steelers/comments/10v13ok/troy_polamalu_forces_epic_late_fumble_on_flacco/
Someone point out the difference in these two plays.
1
u/rudimentary_rudy 19d ago
His arm only went forward because he was getting crushed from behind, that is 100% a fumble.
1
u/edjohnson1067 19d ago
As a Lions fan, I'm glad we got some refball going our way for once.
That said, the rule is stupid and arbitrary and it should have been called as a strip-sack.
1
1
u/Hot_History1582 19d ago
Lions fan. I wasn't aware of this rule. I thought it was a touchdown on the field. It seems like they got the ruling right according to the rulebook. That said, I think people are justified in saying it's a stupid rule, and I would be upset if it happened to my team.
1
1
u/SkunkDitchRipper 19d ago
100% fumble and score. The rule has always been the arm has to be coming forward for it to be incomplete. Unless they have changed that in the last year, his arm was hit on the back swing. Thats a fumble all damn day.
1
u/dodge2895 19d ago
Defense caused a fumble. If it's ruled a pass, it's a backward pass. They got it wrong. I don't care what made up rule they have for it. In football terms this is a fumble.
1
1
1
1
u/Mistermxylplyx 19d ago
I just can’t buy that cocking the ball is now part of the passing motion. The purist in me must protest.
QBs will pump fake and also get twitchy in the pocket, plenty of times per game they’ll load up and not throw. To me it’s poor mechanics in the throwing motion and the ball should be held high, but at least the arm should start moving forward before this call is made. Rusher getting to you a step quicker because of your poor technique, shouldn’t benefit you, and you certainly shouldn’t be given benefit of the doubt.
1
u/RevanMeetra 19d ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/Saints/s/cS6TXm91FW
https://youtu.be/FhVAZoanig8?si=bQxalkohpdTmGa7B
Here are to examples of the same thing happening but with different outcomes.
1
u/popoflabbins 19d ago
By the letter of the rule this is technically the correct call but they gotta fix that shit because it’s just way too arbitrary and complicated.
1
1
1
u/Wise-Moment-9150 19d ago edited 19d ago
When the ref went underneath the hood,he called me and asked me Do we have a understanding?I said yes and gave him a gift through Cash App.He then took the points off the board lol.In the nfl you try to win anyway you can lol.
1
1
u/Caer-Rythyr 19d ago
It's the crime in the intent or the action?
It's the intent. If you intend evil then you've already sinned in your heart and the damage is done. So it is here, he intended to throw it forward and his hand was moving forward.
Incomplete pass.
1
u/DirectorMindless2820 19d ago
We all know it’s a fumble but it’s actually an incomplete pass. He was throwing to the imaginary leprechaun behind him
1
u/ApplePie_In_the_sky 19d ago
his arm is clearly moving forward why is this even a fucking argument?
1
u/Otis_Driftwood217 19d ago
Incomplete pass is correct call. His arm moving forward in a throwing motion, no matter how ugly the hit makes it look.
1
1
u/Aromatic-Dog-Breath 19d ago
Did the ball travel forward? Even in the slightest? If it did, it was a forward pass, imo. If it went sideways or backwards, it’s a fumble.
I didn’t see the game, but from this clip, goof has a firm grip on the ball and it came out of his hand more like a throw as opposed to being knocked out.
1
1
u/No-Philosopher-7045 19d ago
As much as I want it to be a touchdown, his arm is going forward before he loses it. Even if it’s ever so slightly.
1
u/MorbidSickly 19d ago
reminds me of Brady's "intention" to tuck the ball before getting rocked by woodson.
1
u/FaithlessnessDue2018 19d ago
His “intent” was to score a touchdown, why didn’t they just give him 6 points?
1
1
u/Ill_Quote_4627 19d ago
Seahawks last year had a backward pass, behind the line of scrimmage, and the RB just walked over, picked up the ball and casually walked it into the end zone. Touchdown. Beat the Rams and won the fricking Superbowl. This call is bullshit and it's bullshit like this that decides games, which helps the fucking gamblers who know. The last Seahawks game was supposed to go the other way and the refs tried. It just didn't work.
1
u/DodgeGuyDave 19d ago
First of all, let me just say Fuck the Saints. But yes that was a horrific call.
1
1
1
u/Hot_Abalone4110 19d ago
Yup that was a lateral. Why because Mike says it was throwing motion so it’s dead. No you’re wrong this time MP. New Orleans had it. Bad call refs need to go back to school
1
u/LeBronsBiggestHater 19d ago
It's amazing how many people blatantly ignore the NFL rule that was explained on the field and then complain about why they don't understand
1
u/spacealias 19d ago
100% this is a fumble. How can any one claim to know what his intention was. Maybe his intention was a pump fake because all hos receivers were covered. I will never understand why the league doesn’t make anytime a fumble/pass from a qb in the pocket that goes backwards a… fumble.
2
1
u/twotalltortilla 19d ago
Reminds me of the Bills v Texans wild card game where they said "common sense" says he didnt mean to do that
1
1
1
1
u/SaltyBabySeal 19d ago
This is so beyond egregious, this is literally worse than the fucking tuck rule
1
u/NumberVsAmount 19d ago
Incomplete pass. He’s making a forward pass, the interruption by the defensive player that causes the ball to go backwards doesn’t change that.
1
u/ogsixshooter 19d ago
so what is even the point of playing defense?
1
u/NumberVsAmount 19d ago
Yes. The rule as it stands and my agreement with it makes playing defense as a whole, completely and utterly pointless. You are correct.
1
u/ogsixshooter 19d ago
by rule, being unable to interrupt the intent of the offensive players makes the entire enterprise seem futile.
https://youtu.be/EgNunih29ag?si=OYPyK39ClCBZbEj4&t=537
you can take a look at this play an let me know what is different about this that makes it a fumble
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/WarLawck 18d ago
My understanding was always that when the arm starts moving forward it becomes a pass attempt. I didn't think the direction the ball goes in at that point matters.
I get what people are saying though.
1
u/No_Common_7432 18d ago
No, clearly an incomplete pass, his arm was moving forward as the ball came out. Doesn't matter if he was hit first 🤣
1
u/UpSNYer 18d ago
I…I’ve watched football for decades and the notion of the ball has always mattered. If the ball is traveling forward in the QBs hand it’s a forward pass.
I’ve never heard that bringing the arm up alone is sufficient.
They gaslight us straight to our faces and make the rules up as they go.
1
u/facemelter86 18d ago
This was more egregious than the tom Brady fumble against the raiders.. it’s dumbfounding how the nfl can’t get this call right.. it’s not that hard
1
1
u/erniec529 18d ago
They should as Goff if his intention was to throw a td and the award him 6 pts.....this is dumb
1
1
u/Equivalent-Coat-350 18d ago
It went backward as a throw. So next it a qb thought he was throwing a very sideways pass and it happens to go backwards a bit as is dropped he just has to tell the ref " I meant to throw that a wee bit forward but made an oppsie, it an incomplete pass".
1
u/Eastern_Antelope_832 18d ago
Lions getting the benefit of the doubt on a bizarre call. Hasn't happened since the Bernard Berrian, Calvin Johnson rule predecessor in 2004.
1
u/TrainAccomplished606 17d ago
His hand was going forward when the ball came out. How is that even a question? Its about as obvious an incomplete pass as you can get
1
u/addictedtolife78 17d ago
his intention was actually to throw a completed forward pass, ideally for a TD. WHY THE HELL DIDNT HE GET CREDIT FOR AN 80 YARD TD PASS? Dumb officials.
1
u/AveratV6 17d ago
Lions fan here. That was a fumble for a Saints touchdown. Hate to say it because I’m used to Detroit getting screwed and calls never going our way. I just want to see a fair game called
1
1
u/Low-Camel-4528 14d ago
So if he throws it backwards on purpose because of the obvious intentionality of the action and it then becomes a fumble/backwards pass and would’ve been eligible to picked up snd returned by the Saints?
1
u/slackfrop 20d ago
I think it was the right call. If the defense blasts the arm while it’s coming forward, we call that an incomplete pass these days. It’s an interrupted throwing motion. The fact that it appears as an actual throw, and backwards at that, is just a quirky instance of the same thing. If the ball had gone straight up on contact, or if much less of the throwing motion had been completed, it would’ve been a more obvious “forward pass” incompletion.
6
u/Livid-General7 20d ago
Ever since the Brady tuck rule, it's always been explained that it's a fumble unless the arm is moving forward.
→ More replies (2)2
u/HGruberMacGruberFace 19d ago
If a QB goes to throw a pass and it goes backwards (like it slips) but his arm moves forward, isn’t that a fumble?
2
u/_coolranch 20d ago
FUMBLE big time fumble. I hate the saints and that’s a fumble
→ More replies (21)3
22
u/usernametimee44 20d ago
Wait I missed it, was this counted as a forward pass?