That Safety

tnathan · Post by **tnathan** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 8:41 pm

I am NOT one to blame refs for a game. games shouldn't ever come down to refs and we ought to be able to overcome setbacks.

BUT - someone help me understand what the deal was with the safety? I had no audio at the bar i was at, but is there something I don't understand about the rules here?
It looked crystal clear that Plummer's arm was pretty much all the way down and that he knocked the ball lose with his non-throwing hand as he tried to grab the ball with both hands. So why was it overturned? What i mean is, was it just a totally botched call, or did i miss something with the rule?

not going to blame the refs, but that was the turning point in the game, a total momentum shift. could have won anyway, so there are a lot of positives to take away.

skinsfanno9 · Post by **skinsfanno9** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 8:43 pm

If that was a good call, then they REALLY have a problem with the rules. To virtually EVERYONE, including all the players on the field (such as Plummer), that was a fumble. If the rules say this was really an incomplete pass, then the rules REALLY need changing.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:16 pm

Here's my problem. He touched the ball with his left hand. At that point it ceases being a pass. But still, even if it was a pass, it went BACKWARD. It should have been ruled a fumbled lateral. 2 points Redskins!

Hoss · Post by **Hoss** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:20 pm

from espn....

This was based on Rule 3, Section 21, Article 2, Note 2 of the NFL rule book: "...any intentional forward movement of [the passer's] arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body."

http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs01/s/200 ... 14426.html

I guess the interpretation of this rule can be very subjective. :roll:

fredp45 · Post by **fredp45** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 10:08 pm

He pumped and held up...no question. The announcers were right -- intent was clear...that was a fumble. Guess home teams get calls -- let's hope we get them against the Eagles, Chargers, Giants, Boys, etc...

The stupid stuff has to stop...Novak hit the 54 yarder and Sellers was moving early... Dang. How many times do you see guys move early on FGs??? freaking never.

We played our butts off in that game too. I was impressed with our offense.

Rusty Shackleford · Post by **Rusty Shackleford** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 2:50 am

Heard this on the radio post game. Okay so its ruled an incomplete pass..BUT the pass went backwards no? Doesn't that make it a lateral, thus, still a safety. Can anyone clear that up? I am still pissed about this....

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:31 am

Yea, it was going backwards. Complete joke. I've thought this rule was a sham ever since that infamous Raiders/Patriots game where the refs gave the game to the Patriots after the Raiders had just won. This rule is an embarrassment to the league. They have to do something about this rule.

redskingush · Post by **redskingush** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:58 am

clearly a fumble, even a cowboys fan would agree.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 7:22 am

Lets see if they review this call on that show on NFL network. They have some head referee dude come in and explain all of the questionable calls. I doubt they'll do it for us. They'll have to use the entire segment for the Ravens game.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:44 am

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Lets see if they review this call on that show on NFL network. They have some head referee dude come in and explain all of the questionable calls. I doubt they'll do it for us. They'll have to use the entire segment for the Ravens game.

NFL Primetime reviewed this play. They came away with the same opinion that we have on this one :roll:

USS Redskin · Post by **USS Redskin** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:14 am

Its complete B.S. They should just do away with this rule - but they won't b/c offense puts butts in the seats.

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:16 am

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Lets see if they review this call on that show on NFL network. They have some head referee dude come in and explain all of the questionable calls.

I was thinking the same thing. Lets hope he does it. This call has got to be in the top three of the most questionable calls of the week.

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:49 am

Merged "Safety/Tuck Rule Threads."

welch · Post by **welch** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 10:04 am

We could not hear the announcers at our bar, either. My son, listening through the internet to Sonny and Sam, explained the "tuck rule".

Baloney, as everyone says.

- Same play as the spectacular Aikman fumble in the endzone in '92 at RFK. So they changed the rules, sometime, because Jimmy Johnson tore off his hair-piece. Then

- Plummer hit the ball with his left hand as it was coming down. I saw that too. Suggests fumble.

- The ball went backward. A lateral, and therefore a free ball. Fumble.

- Or a pass thrown at his feet in the endzone. Intentional grounding in the endzone = safety.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:20 am

JSPB22 wrote:Here's my problem. He touched the ball with his left hand. At that point it ceases being a pass. But still, even if it was a pass, it went BACKWARD. It should have been ruled a fumbled lateral. 2 points Redskins!

They say he was trying to tuck the ball back in and that is the reason it wasn't a fumble.

I didn't see the game but I saw the replay.

Once his left hand made contact with the ball, wouldn't the tuck be complete? Any loss of the ball at that point is a fumble, right? Or was it then a incomplete backward pass :cry:

They blew a few calls in that game but that was a big one.

Scooter · Post by **Scooter** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:42 am

I guess I don't understand the tuck rule, or does anyone? The refs took two points, and the game from the Skins by ruling Plummers fumble to be a "tuck". Then last night, Carson Palmer fumbled, after bringing the ball down...
Clearly, the Skins outplayed the Broncos - in Denver, and would have won the gmae, because they'd have no need to go for "two" to win the game in the end.

gay4pacman · Post by **gay4pacman** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:51 am

yeah that palmer fumble looked pretty similar to the fumble in Denver. Home cooking. If we were at fed ex we get that call, but you cant complain because we did get some calls down the line that put us back in the game. Patten with another phantom pass interference on fourth down to put us right back in.

georgiaredskin · Post by **georgiaredskin** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:53 am

Medicated tucks. Hmmm, reminds me of hanging chads....

skinsfan#33 · Post by **skinsfan#33** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:59 am

Scooter wrote:I guess I don't understand the tuck rule, or does anyone? The refs took two points, and the game from the Skins by ruling Plummers fumble to be a "tuck". Then last night, Carson Palmer fumbled, after bringing the ball down...
Clearly, the Skins outplayed the Broncos - in Denver, and would have won the gmae, because they'd have no need to go for "two" to win the game in the end.

The difference between Palmer's fumble and Jake the Mistake's is that Palmer never started a throwing motion and Plummer did!

The refs made the wrong call on Plummer's fumble though. They were right that Jake had started a throwing motion and never completed it by pulling the ball back to his body (the tuck part of the rule). But there mistake was the fact that the ball went backwards. An incomplete backwards pass (AKA a latteral) is considered a fumble and the Skins should have had a safety.

Speeking of the refs: the only person that is allowed to intentionally ground the ball outside of the tackels is the QB (or whomever takes the ball from center). When Rod Smith threw the ball away when he was trying to throw it he was doing it to avoid taking the "sack". He threw the ball out of bounds with no receiver in the area which is intentional grounding since he isn't the QB.

Scooter · Post by **Scooter** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:17 pm

Good points, I'll have to watch Palmer again - but it looked more like a tuck because the left hand didn't touch the ball. Jake's left hand touched the ball before it got punched loose...
Guess we could, coulda, woulda, shoulda this for a while - I'm still pretty darn proud of my Skins!

skinsfan#33 · Post by **skinsfan#33** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:49 pm

welch wrote:We could not hear the announcers at our bar, either. My son, listening through the internet to Sonny and Sam, explained the "tuck rule".

Baloney, as everyone says.

- Same play as the spectacular Aikman fumble in the endzone in '92 at RFK. So they changed the rules, sometime, because Jimmy Johnson tore off his hair-piece. Then

- Plummer hit the ball with his left hand as it was coming down. I saw that too. Suggests fumble.

- The ball went backward. A lateral, and therefore a free ball. Fumble.

- Or a pass thrown at his feet in the endzone. Intentional grounding in the endzone = safety.

It wasn't the same as the Aikman fumble in 92 - his arm never started going forward (while he still had the ball that is)

welch · Post by **welch** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:31 pm

Depends on the "he". In '92, Aikman started to throw but saw Darrell Green step in front of Irvin so he tried to pull his hand back but lost his grip.

skinsfan#33 · Post by **skinsfan#33** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 10:51 pm

welch wrote:Depends on the "he". In '92, Aikman started to throw but saw Darrell Green step in front of Irvin so he tried to pull his hand back but lost his grip.

That isn't they play that I was thinking of. I was thinking of the Play were Aikman was hit in the endzone before his hand started coming forward and Danny Copeland recovered it for a TD.

RayNAustin · Post by **RayNAustin** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 10:53 pm

As I see it (and everyone on the field including Jake), he "completed the tuck" and his left hand kocked the ball loose after the fact. If you want to stretch the meaning of the tuck rule, then the others are correct....when the ball went behind him, that would be a latteral, and a free ball, not an incomplete pass.

The bigger blown call however was the Patten TD call back. The whole thing stinks to high heaven.

IONTOP · Post by **IONTOP** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:29 pm

Okay so here's my idea, next time Mark Brunell is about to get sacked, instead of throwing it away and getting an intentional grounding penalty, just do a pump fake and knock the ball out of your hand with your other hand. It seems flawless.

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

That Safety

That Safety

Tuck rule confusion

Medicated Tucks

Re: Medicated Tucks

Can we use the "Tuck Rule"?