Fumbles

[Geor!]

At what point is the arm no longer going foward? Sanchez fumbled the ball with his arm coming back in towards his body, yet after review they reversed it saying his arm was going foward. If you look, if he were to have "thrown" the ball, it would have fallen right at his feet or behind him, which would, ultimately, have made it a fumble, but since the ball was knocked out, it's an incomplete pass. Is this the "in the grasp" rule? The Giants got robbed, if you ask me.

Hold your personal opinions about the giants aside and explain that ruling to me.

[Superwho]

At what point is the arm no longer going foward? Sanchez fumbled the ball with his arm coming back in towards his body, yet after review they reversed it saying his arm was going foward. If you look, if he were to have "thrown" the ball, it would have fallen right at his feet or behind him, which would, ultimately, have made it a fumble, but since the ball was knocked out, it's an incomplete pass. Is this the "in the grasp" rule? The Giants got robbed, if you ask me.

Hold your personal opinions about the giants aside and explain that ruling to me.

Happened to us last week, Yates arm was still going back and got knocked out in the red zone, they called it fumble, pereira even came on and said it wasn't a fumble, challenged it, the call stood. The nfl is quickly degrading into the nba with the quality of refs these past couple of years. They have to watch for too much, but are too stubborn to say they are wrong.

[Geor!]

Sounds like we might be talking about two difference scenarios. In this instance, the call was reversed. In the case you're describing, it was not reversed, but probably shouldn't have been either, if his arm was still coming back.

In the case I am describing, Sanchez's arm had finished coming forward and was in the process of coming back in toward his body. The ball, if released at the time it was knocked out would have been at least parallel to his feet, therefore, it would have been a fumble if he let go of it, but since it was knocked out, it's a fumble. I just don't understand how you can rule it that way.

[SouthernSVT]

They call it the "tuck rule". I don't understand it worth shit though. It started with Tom Brady getting out of a fumble (surprise surprise) vs the Raiders. So they made it a rule. The rule is pretty much crap though.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

[Nash B.]

At what point is the arm no longer going foward? Sanchez fumbled the ball with his arm coming back in towards his body, yet after review they reversed it saying his arm was going foward. If you look, if he were to have "thrown" the ball, it would have fallen right at his feet or behind him, which would, ultimately, have made it a fumble, but since the ball was knocked out, it's an incomplete pass. Is this the "in the grasp" rule? The Giants got robbed, if you ask me.

Hold your personal opinions about the giants aside and explain that ruling to me.

Is it a different one than I saw? The defender knocked the ball out of his hand as it was going forward (hit the ball, not the arm). It was originally ruled a fumble, then reversed and ruled an incomplete because his arm was going forward. I think the rule should be amended/interpreted so that if the ball is knocked out of his hand, regardless of what the arm is doing, it should be a fumble; if the arm is hit and causes him to release the ball, then the current rule applies.

[Geor!]

Is it a different one than I saw? The defender knocked the ball out of his hand as it was going forward (hit the ball, not the arm). It was originally ruled a fumble, then reversed and ruled an incomplete because his arm was going forward. I think the rule should be amended/interpreted so that if the ball is knocked out of his hand, regardless of what the arm is doing, it should be a fumble; if the arm is hit and causes him to release the ball, then the current rule applies.

Yeah, different. Happened about ten minutes before the pkay you're regerring to.

[Superwho]

Sounds like we might be talking about two difference scenarios. In this instance, the call was reversed. In the case you're describing, it was not reversed, but probably shouldn't have been either, if his arm was still coming back.

Yeah, I described it wrong, I meant forward but had the word reversed in my head, same thing. Here's a pic of it happening
Also it was two weeks back

[Shorty]

In the case I am describing, Sanchez's arm had finished coming forward and was in the process of coming back in toward his body. The ball, if released at the time it was knocked out would have been at least parallel to his feet, therefore, it would have been a fumble if he let go of it, but since it was knocked out, it's a fumble. I just don't understand how you can rule it that way.

The commentators were saying that because of the "tuck rule", the ball would have to get back to his body and he'd have to become a "runner." If he took off running as his arm was coming down like that they would have ruled it a fumble but since he was still standing as if he was passing the tuck rule make it incomplete as long as the arm is going forward. I probably did a bad job of explaining that but it's a convoluted rule.