Panteraize Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "If the passer loses possession of the ball while
> attempting to recock his arm, it is a fumble."
>
> RT never recocked his arm. This was no tuck rule
> nonsense, which is now removed from the rule book.
> And again I bring the same questions.
That's passage is defining what is a "tuck" rule incompletion and what is a fumble.
Under the tuck rule its incomplete if his hand starts forward and he starts to pull the ball down. That's a bullshit rule but it was a rule nonetheless.
The passage you quoted has NOTHING to do with the RT play because his hand NEVER started forward with the ball in it to initate a forward pass attempt. All it does is clarify that if a tuck rule situation occurs and he "attempts to re-cock" or reload his arm to throw and the ball comes out then then its a fumble.
> Please refer
> me to a single play in NFL history when a QB
> launched a ball 12 yards forward at the peak of
> his extended throwing motion and it was considered
> a fumble. Had that ball been caught we would have
> had an interception. AND AGAIN I have seen this
> exact play 1,000 times and seen it called an
> incomplete. I don't know why Tom Brady comes to
> mind but off the top of my head but I feel like
> I've seen dozens of plays that look like this from
> a pass Brady has thrown and never seen it get
> called a fumble. Forget Brady, ANY QB.
Yes...because nobody can instantly find a clip show a rule being enforced in the past the rule can't exist.
If a tree falls in a forest and there is nobody there to hear it, does it make a sound?
>
> I'm sorry but in the most archaic of terms, the
> ball needs to hit the ground upon impact from the
> hit of a D-lineman for a fumble to get called, not
> FLLLYYY forward and hit the hash marks in front of
> a WR's feet 12 yards down the field. When you
> track the ball up and aaalllllll the way down like
> you do a home run hit in baseball, across the
> football field. The ball was launched forward.
> That is it. That is all. That is the end. The QB
> threw the ball forward. It left his hands and
> landed 12 yards in front if him. Maintaining
> control would imply that he could not have
> launched the ball forward in the manner he did.
> But he did. He had enough control to throw the
> ball at the end point of his throwing motion.
> That's a throw. It was a shitty call.
You can lead a horse to water...
> And even
> worse, with the play being over, awarding
> possession to the team of the guy that hands the
> ball to the ref??? A fumble is something you cant
> go back on after killing the play. Otherwise we
> would have won the Steelers game we played last
> year when Ben fumbled in his own endzone but we
> didn't get it because the play was over, despite
> the fact that we covered up the ball.
That's an entirely different matter.
If a ref had blown the call dead (blowing his whistle and waving his arms to indicate an incomplete pass) and then given it to Indy it WOULD have been a travesty.
But again...watch the replay. No official blew the ball dead.
So the only thing they could do...under the rules...is give the ball to the team that recovered it...which they did.