A lot of people question the Easley-fumble-touchback rule

U

uihawk82

Well-Known Member
This was an interesting discussion during the game and on postgame radio. Many callers think the ball should be given to the offense at the point of the fumble when it goes forward into and out of the end zone. They think it is a dumb rule.

But the rule does make sense for a number of reasons. Some people say the rule is to keep the offense from intentionally fumbling the ball into the end zone to try to get a recovery and a score. It is also very similar to the free kick on a kickoff and a punt where the kicking team in both cases does not possess the ball after the kick and if it rolls into and out of the end zone. In this case with Easley and in general the offense has made the error, it is a free ball, and in rolling into the through the end zone it is like the free ball kicking situations.

I have also heard it stated that going out of the end zone there is no line of scrimmage to set the ball.

This rule goes for and against all teams and it makes sense in a way. At the same time I would not have any problem with a rule change giving the offense the ball back from a regular scrimmage run or pass play at the spot of the fumble.

Is this the best explanation and would you like to see the rule changed in what way?
 
I think the offense should get the ball where they fumble it. The other team doesn't get possession when the ball is fumbled out of bounds between the goal lines, so they shouldn't get the ball when it goes out of bounds in the end zone. Just my opinion, of course. I've never liked the rule.
 
99topdawg said:
I think the offense should get the ball where they fumble it. The other team doesn't get possession when the ball is fumbled out of bounds between the goal lines, so they shouldn't get the ball when it goes out of bounds in the end zone. Just my opinion, of course. I've never liked the rule.
Click to expand...

Like I say I can agree with your line of thought. Any other time the offense fumbles out of bounds between the goal lines the offense retains the ball.
 
It's such a weird rule and I hate that it really swings a game when the defense doesn't even recover the ball. I disagree with it but I'm not really sure what else you can do. Maybe give the offense the ball back but at the 20 yard line?

The Easley play in particular I didn't think there was indisputable evidence that he fumbled before he broke the plane. I'm pretty confident he did fumble it but I never saw an angle that proved it without a doubt.
 
I agree with the rule. You fumble it out of the end zone it is like a punt. You lost control through the end zone. You dont get to bring it back to the last place you didnt mess up. Hold onto the ball! I dont think there was enough to overturn the td from all the angles i saw however.
 
uihawk82 said:
Some people say the rule is to keep the offense from intentionally fumbling the ball into the end zone to try to get a recovery and a score.
Click to expand...

If true, this might be the dumbest thing I have ever heard.
I mean when in THEE hell would anyone ever do that?
 
GotTimDodge said:
If true, this might be the dumbest thing I have ever heard.
I mean when in THEE hell would anyone ever do that?
Click to expand...

September 10th, 1978.
Raiders vs. Chargers.
Dave Casper fumble recovery in the end zone. I am too stupid to find a link to video but one is probably out there some where.
 
I like the rule. In an offensive day and age with all the rules favoring the offense, I like the fact that the defense gets one little rule that helps them out in very odd times. All the players that dive and extend the football, there is a risk to it as well as there should be. It doesn't happen that often anyway.
 
GotTimDodge said:
If true, this might be the dumbest thing I have ever heard.
I mean when in THEE hell would anyone ever do that?
Click to expand...

4th and goal or with the time running out would be the only reason to do that. If the rule was that, if you recover ahead of the spot of the fumble that it comes back to the spot of the fumble, it would take care of that.
 
proudhawkfan21 said:
I agree with the rule. You fumble it out of the end zone it is like a punt. You lost control through the end zone. You dont get to bring it back to the last place you didnt mess up. Hold onto the ball! I dont think there was enough to overturn the td from all the angles i saw however.
Click to expand...
there certainly wasn't undisputable evidence to overrule the call on the field though. Those refs and the replay official were a bunch of chumps. Horrid officiating across the board.
 
deanvogs said:
I like the rule. In an offensive day and age with all the rules favoring the offense, I like the fact that the defense gets one little rule that helps them out in very odd times. All the players that dive and extend the football, there is a risk to it as well as there should be. It doesn't happen that often anyway.
Click to expand...

Yet the defense is also capable of recovering the ball in these situations. Why do they get something as large as a change of possession for doing nothing?
 
99topdawg said:
4th and goal or with the time running out would be the only reason to do that. If the rule was that, if you recover ahead of the spot of the fumble that it comes back to the spot of the fumble, it would take care of that.
Click to expand...

Well time would stop because the ball went out of bounds, and they don't get a first down, so I'm still not seeing the point.
 
BrianFerentzForPresident said:
Yet the defense is also capable of recovering the ball in these situations. Why do they get something as large as a change of possession for doing nothing?
Click to expand...

For doing nothing? Causing a fumble is doing nothing? Why should the offense get rewarded for fumbling the ball?

I don't think this is that big of a deal, it has been this way as long as I remember.
 
99topdawg said:
4th and goal or with the time running out would be the only reason to do that. If the rule was that, if you recover ahead of the spot of the fumble that it comes back to the spot of the fumble, it would take care of that.
Click to expand...
This is what I've always thought the perfect solution would be. It takes away any advantage from fumbling on purpose and you'd lose a down.
 
A fumble is a free ball with no team possessing it. The end zone is not in the field of play. If a fumble goes into and out of the end zone, without being possessed, then it literally is the same as a punt or a kickoff where the ball goes into and out of the end zone. It is a touch back. If you give the offense possession at the point of which they fumbled the ball, you break the fundamental premise the game of football is based; no one owns the ball unless they possess it. You could, therefore, argue that a punt or a kickoff that goes out of bounds would go back to the kicking team.

We've benefited from this in recent years. It sucked but its the rule and I don't think you can change the rule without breaking the fundamental premise of the game of football.
 
deanvogs said:
For doing nothing? Causing a fumble is doing nothing? Why should the offense get rewarded for fumbling the ball?

I don't think this is that big of a deal, it has been this way as long as I remember.
Click to expand...
I get your point, but I don't see it as a reward. Giving the ball to the defense is a reward when they didn't even recover the ball, so your logic runs the other way as well.

Causing a fumble is all fine and dandy, but simply causing a fumble doesn't give your team the ball anywhere else on the field. I don't see any justification on the basis of merit when it happens near the end zone and the ball happens to cross the plane and roll out of bounds. Good for the defense, they stopped a touchdown, but they didn't recover the ball.
 
ArvadaHawk said:
A fumble is a free ball with no team possessing it. The end zone is not in the field of play. If a fumble goes into and out of the end zone, without being possessed, then it literally is the same as a punt or a kickoff where the ball goes into and out of the end zone. It is a touch back. If you give the offense possession at the point of which they fumbled the ball, you break the fundamental premise the game of football is based; no one owns the ball unless they possess it. You could, therefore, argue that a punt or a kickoff that goes out of bounds would go back to the kicking team.

We've benefited from this in recent years. It sucked but its the rule and I don't think you can change the rule without breaking the fundamental premise of the game of football.
Click to expand...
This is a fair argument. I don't necessarily agree with it, but that's really just because "muh feelings." I still believe that giving such a huge advantage to the defense over a fumble anywhere else on the field is unjustified, but I can follow your logic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top