On the Sanchez fumble

I thought it hit Sanchez's helmet and bounced backwards, not that it was thrown backwards prior to crossing his shoulder. DBJ rewatched and said that was not the case, so it was a backwards pass.

 

Yes the ball needs to go forward. It didn't. It was a backward pass at best if not a fumble. A backward pass is the same as a fumble, a live ball. Either way you look at it, it was going to become a fumble.

The only way we were going to keep the ball was if it was ruled incomplete. In that case, they'd review it, and come back and say since it was ruled a catch, the play had been called dead the moment it ball landed. Hence the offense keeps the ball, but the LoS now becomes the spot the ball landed at.

 

Does anyone else feel that if it was Brady there would have been another new rule invented on the spot...the "cocked" rule or the "Reload" rule :lol:

 

It hit the defenders helmet, causing the actual fumble. With the extra little power Sanchez would generate on the pass without hitting the defenders helmet, it would have become an incomplete forward pass

 

Yes, backward passes with the intention of no trick plays become incomplete, rather a fumble.

 

They would have just called it an incomplete pass and decide it's not worth reviewing.

 

I was wondering why the "Tuck Rule" or some other nonsense wasn't invented on that play.

 

# When a passer is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional movement forward of his arm starts a forward pass. If a defensive player contacts the passer or the ball after forward movement begins, and the ball leaves the passer’s hand, a forward pass is ruled, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground or a player.

Thus it should've been incomplete

 

http://gamerewind.nfl.com/nflgr/game?id=55161&play=1798&icampaign=GR_Free_Clip_nfl


The ball hits Taylor's helmet, not Mark's. Last night looking at it I thought it was a
fumble, but watching it now, the ball travels too far and his hand does look like it's
moving forward ever so slightly. If it had been called incomplete I don't think they
would have over turned it.

 

I can't recall that play. Maybe it was too close to call it backward pass? When did it happen? I need to go look at that play cuz it is considered a pitch rather than a pass when the ball is passed backwards.

In 2002 (I think), I remember Curtis Martin ended the 2nd last game of the season with 996 yards. In the NFL, you never know if you'd play another game, so I wasn't too excited about that. But during the wk, NFL changed one of Curtis Martins reception into run, a 15 yard run I believe. NFL reviewed the play (probably do it on a weekly basis) and said it was a backward pass and not a forward pass as originally recorded. The switch from pass to run gave Curtis his 1000 yard season. Anyone else remember that? I could be off on the year, but looking at his stats, I think it was 2002.

 

u have a link?

 

It's Rule 10.1.7 from the NFL Rule Book. It's also why I was so confused by the explanations you guys were giving last night, but I didn't have a rule book to look up the obscure rule I figured you guys knew.

 

Yeah on any fumble/incomplete pass play the only thing that matters is "was the arm going forward?" The ball could go 100 yards backwards, it doesn't matter if the arm was moving forward.

And, to me, it looked like his arm was just starting to go forward. It was too close to really make an overturn though, and unfortunately they'll always rule live ball on the field, and sort out the incomplete pass or fumble later. It was the right call by Hochuli not to overturn it.

The real question is why are we throwing there in the first freaking place!? It's 3rd and 17 with 1:13 or junk left on the clock, just run a draw play, get 8 yards, make the Steelers use one of their 2 remaining timeouts, and pray they just sit on it, and if not, stop em! They weren't going to run the ball with so little time left, and Big Ben hadn't been exactly gashing us through the air.

 

I didn't have a DVR where I was watching the game, so I couldn't rewind. Rewatching that now, that ball was in fact knocked out by the defender's helmet, which didn't make contact until after the arm was moving forward. Bad call, but too late to bitch about it.

 

I wasn't aware of that I guess. I had that Cutler play in mind called by Hochuli few yrs ago. But the defender never contacted him so I guess its different. However, I still think the ball came loose when the defenders helmet hit the ball.

 

It clearly was not a backwards pass. It simply cant be if the qb's arm is moving foward and a defender making contract with the arm causes the ball to become dislodged. It doesnt matter if it lands an inch behind the qb or 20 yards behind the qb.

Now, the question is was it a pass or a fumble. The rule, as I understand it, is that as lond as the arm begins to move forward as the ball is still in the arm, it is considered an incomplete pass. To me, that was a pass because the ball started to come loose after the arm began to move forward.

It was close, but I think it was an incomplete pass. It's a shame that that play turned out to be the difference in the game when all was said and done.

 

I agree pretty much with your assessment on this, I've watched the replay many times and while the Jet fan side of me says his arm was moving forward, another side of me says it hadn't started forward at the time of contact. In short, I believe the replay was inconclusive either way, if the play had been ruled an incomplete pass on the field it would have stood as an incomplete pass, but it was ruled a fumble on the field and thus stood, the video replay rule requires conclusive and clear evidence to overturn a field ruling. and if I'm 100% honest I have to concede that it's not unrefutable that his arm was moving forward or not. Sad but true.