Incorrect Fumble Recovery Ruling?

KnightHawk9

KnightHawk9

Well-Known Member
I've been thinking about this since Saturday, but nobody else has mentioned it. Perhaps someone who knows the rules better can correct me, but I believe the ruling of Miller's 4th down fumble was incorrect. I believe when an offensive player fumbles the ball forward and it is recovered by another offensive player, the ball is moved back to the spot of the fumble rather than advanced.

Wasn't he stopped short of the marker on 4th down and then the ball was recovered past the marker?

According to this website, and this section in the official rules, the ball should have been moved back to the spot of the fumble, short of the first down.

Caught or Recovered
ARTICLE 2. a. When a backward pass or fumble is caught or recovered by any
inbounds player, the ball continues in play (A.R. 2-23-1-I).
Exceptions:
1. Rule 8-3-2-d-5 (Team A fumble on the try).Rule 7 / snaPPinG and PassinG The Ball FR-75
2. On fourth down before a change of team possession, when a Team
A fumble is caught or recovered by a Team A player other than the
fumbler, the ball is dead. If the catch or recovery is beyond the spot of
the fumble, the ball is returned to the spot of the fumble. If the catch or
recovery is behind the spot of the fumble, the ball remains at the spot of
the catch or recovery
Click to expand...

I'm not saying we would have gone 80 yards to score a TD, recovered an onside kick, and scored again, but it would have been fun to watch them try.

What am I missing?
 
KnightHawk9 said:
I've been thinking about this since Saturday, but nobody else has mentioned it. Perhaps someone who knows the rules better can correct me, but I believe the ruling of Miller's 4th down fumble was incorrect. I believe when an offensive player fumbles the ball forward and it is recovered by another offensive player, the ball is moved back to the spot of the fumble rather than advanced.

Wasn't he stopped short of the marker on 4th down and then the ball was recovered past the marker?

According to this website, and this section in the official rules, the ball should have been moved back to the spot of the fumble, short of the first down.



I'm not saying we would have gone 80 yards to score a TD, recovered an onside kick, and scored again, but it would have been fun to watch them try.

What am I missing?
Click to expand...

Miller's fumble was on 3rd down.
 
I agree too, I don't think the osu cheater ( who btw abuses women ) was in on the first "touchdown " he was 2-4 inches short. On the second "touchdown " he should have been marked down when his forward motion was stopped well short of the goal line.
 
Last edited:
I want to move on to NW...buy I too am curious on the ruling on this. Prolly wouldn't have mattered but it would have been 4th and short and we would have mayne gotten the ball back if the op is correct. Anybody know this ruling ? I Have not seen this mentioned so figured it was the correct call.
 
Just to clarify, if a fumble is recovered beyond the point of the fumble on 1st, 2nd, or 3rd down, the ball is marked at the spot it was recovered, or the ball can be advanced if the player picks it up without going to the ground himself. This is what happened with Miller's fumble. He fumbled on 3rd down, and it was legally recovered and correctly spotted beyond the 1st down marker. Had it been 4th down, the ball would have come back to the spot of the fumble, and it would have been Iowa ball.
 
thejumper5 said:
Just to clarify, if a fumble is recovered beyond the point of the fumble on 1st, 2nd, or 3rd down, the ball is marked at the spot it was recovered, or the ball can be advanced if the player picks it up without going to the ground himself. This is what happened with Miller's fumble. He fumbled on 3rd down, and it was legally recovered and correctly spotted beyond the 1st down marker. Had it been 4th down, the ball would have come back to the spot of the fumble, and it would have been Iowa ball.
Click to expand...


Thanks. I don't know why I thought it was on 4th. But you are correct, the rule clearly states the difference is on 4th. I had originally thought it was on any down. Oh well.

I also agree with the thought that the first TD should have been reviewed. I'm guessing it was by the review official, just not the broadcast crew.
 
The Hawkeyes are first in everything to me... but I much prefer NFL football to college football for a ton of reasons.

One is the rules - which college is really so elementary school. Why would the down matter? It's just utterly dumb - in the nfl in the last 2:00 of a game all fumbles recovered by the offensive team are moved back to the spot of the fumble.

This is one of many dumb rules that college has.
 
Oh man why did you bring this up. When nebby fumbled forward and out of bounds, i threw a fit. I went nuts. I knew forward and recovered the ball went to the recovered spot, but when it goes out of bounds.
 
I remember the play and said the exact same thing. I knew it was an NFL rule, so i just chalked it up to being a NFL NCAA difference.
 
UberHawk said:
Anyone else remember the play late in the 4th quarter at Michigan in 2006? Mike Hart fumbled, and the ball was not only "recovered" by UM, but miraculously ahead of the 1st down marker.
Click to expand...

Thanks for bringing that one up. I had warshed it from my brain lobes. Hart was short of the first down, and it would've been 4th down in, if i recall correctly, a 3 point game. They get a the ball/first down, and march down and score.
 
Bigtenchamp said:
Just another example of college footballs little league rules... NFL is light years ahead
Click to expand...

The NFL changed their rule after the famous "Holly Roller" play by Ken Stabler in 1978. Here is a good summary from Wikipedia ...

The Holy Roller: The Oakland Raiders won a September 10, 1978, contest against divisional rivals the San Diego Chargers through another intentional fumble. With ten seconds left, down 20-14, quarterback Ken Stabler fumbled the ball forward to avoid being sacked at the Chargers' 15-yard line. Two other players, Pete Banaszak and Dave Casper, attempted to recover it but batted it forward when they could not. Finally it reached the end zone, where Casper fell on it for the tying touchdown, which cleared the way for the extra point that gave the Raiders the win. Officials decided to allow the touchdown on the grounds that the fumbles did not appear to be intentional and thus could not be considered forward passes, but Stabler freely admitted his was. Chargers fans have referred to the play as the Immaculate Deception ever since, and after the 1978 season, the NFL instituted the current rule that a forward fumble in the last two minutes of play (or on fourth down) can only be recovered and/or advanced by the player who originally fumbled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top