PDA

View Full Version : NFL Rules


TexanSam
12-03-2008, 03:40 PM
Amusing article by Rick Reilly. I did not know some of these rules...some players (Chester Pitts included) didn't either.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?section=magazine&id=3737653&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab2pos1

bah007
12-03-2008, 04:18 PM
Is this baseball?

You can't put your QB back in if you get to your third stringer? I've never before heard that one.

feebleminded
12-03-2008, 04:32 PM
Is this baseball?

You can't put your QB back in if you get to your third stringer? I've never before heard that one.

I think it is because you can designate one of your inactives as the emergency or 3rd string QB.

Hardcore Texan
12-03-2008, 05:25 PM
Anything in there about regular season games ending in a tie?

signed,
Donovan McNabb

axman40
12-03-2008, 06:18 PM
Anything in there about regular season games ending in a tie?

signed,
Donovan McNabb
To paraphrase Obama "YES THEY CAN!"
:specnatz:

Thorn
12-03-2008, 06:52 PM
Wow. Some of those rules I've just never heard before. Like the one about catching a punt as the clock expires.

TexanSam
12-03-2008, 07:12 PM
Wow. Some of those rules I've just never heard before. Like the one about catching a punt as the clock expires.

Yeah, that happened just a few weeks ago with Arizona. At least I think that's the game where that rule came up. Might have been a different rule.

I didn't know about the QB one either

feebleminded
12-03-2008, 07:43 PM
I love some of those obscure / oldschool rules.

Anyone remember the Floutie drop kick for a PAT a couple of years ago?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0Jsz-fSNd4

Speedy
12-04-2008, 11:04 PM
I missed the advancing a blocked punt and no penalty running into the quick kicker.

Some of the rules make no damn sense though. Like some of the fumble rules and advancing on fumbles and such.

The Indy game last week I think, where Manning tried to sneak it into the endzone and fumbled at the half yard line, and it was scooped up by a Colt who was sitting on his ass on the goal line and rolled over the line for an apparent TD. NOPE. Only the guy who fumbled can make the recovery for that team. WHAT???? Makes no freaking sense, I don't care what happened in a game before where they had to make that rule.

If you can fumble at the 50 and have a teammate recover, then that's how it should be anywhere on the field.

And on an onsides kick. I think the receiving team can get the ball and advance it. In fact I know they can because I've seen TD's scored from it, but if the kicking team recovers, they can't advance the ball. Just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

And for anybody who doesn't know what happens with tie games in the playoffs, see Rams/Panthers '04, Raiders/Colts '77, Browns/Jets '87, and Dolphins/Chiefs '71. All double OT playoff games.

HJam72
12-05-2008, 07:59 AM
I didn't know there was any such thing as a fair-catch kick.

Maddict5
12-05-2008, 12:32 PM
The Indy game last week I think, where Manning tried to sneak it into the endzone and fumbled at the half yard line, and it was scooped up by a Colt who was sitting on his ass on the goal line and rolled over the line for an apparent TD. NOPE. Only the guy who fumbled can make the recovery for that team. WHAT???? Makes no freaking sense, I don't care what happened in a game before where they had to make that rule.

If you can fumble at the 50 and have a teammate recover, then that's how it should be anywhere on the field.


i didnt see that but i think it mustve been on 4th down because i think thats only when that rule applies (not the field location)

and it makes plenty of sense.. if it was 4th and 4 and the runner was stopped after a yd, he would obviously just 'fumble' (throw) it forward past the marker so his teammates have a shot at recovering it

Speedy
12-05-2008, 01:00 PM
i didnt see that but i think it mustve been on 4th down because i think thats only when that rule applies (not the field location)

and it makes plenty of sense.. if it was 4th and 4 and the runner was stopped after a yd, he would obviously just 'fumble' (throw) it forward past the marker so his teammates have a shot at recovering it

Ah, that's probably what it was and that does make a little better sense, but still, a fumble's a fumble no matter where on the field or what down. The fumble forward on 4th down, I'd just chalk that up as a trick play, guard against it. Don't make a seperate fumble rule.

Vinny
12-05-2008, 01:32 PM
Some of the rules make no damn sense though. Like some of the fumble rules and advancing on fumbles and such.

The Indy game last week I think, where Manning tried to sneak it into the endzone and fumbled at the half yard line, and it was scooped up by a Colt who was sitting on his ass on the goal line and rolled over the line for an apparent TD. NOPE. Only the guy who fumbled can make the recovery for that team. WHAT???? Makes no freaking sense, I don't care what happened in a game before where they had to make that rule.

wow, you are talking about one of the most famous plays in NFL history. The Holy Roller play (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roller_(American_football)).

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=holy+roller+play&ie=utf-8&oe=UTF-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv&oi=property_suggestions&resnum=0&ct=property-revision&cd=1#

Maddict5
12-05-2008, 01:43 PM
Ah, that's probably what it was and that does make a little better sense, but still, a fumble's a fumble no matter where on the field or what down. The fumble forward on 4th down, I'd just chalk that up as a trick play, guard against it. Don't make a seperate fumble rule.

i diagree totally.. you cant 'guard' against it... it would be completely biased against the defence. they stop a guy and he just throws it forward? its a good rule

kastofsna
12-06-2008, 06:21 PM
wow, you are talking about one of the most famous plays in NFL history. The Holy Roller play (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roller_(American_football)).

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=holy+roller+play&ie=utf-8&oe=UTF-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv&oi=property_suggestions&resnum=0&ct=property-revision&cd=1#

i think it should be a judgment call, and if it's obvious that it was an intentional forward fumble then i have no problems with a penalty.

eriadoc
12-06-2008, 07:08 PM
i think it should be a judgment call, and if it's obvious that it was an intentional forward fumble then i have no problems with a penalty.

I want as many judgment calls taken out of the ref's hands as is possible. They botch them so often, I'd just rather eliminate subjectivity to whatever degree possible.

mattieuk
12-06-2008, 08:18 PM
I want as many judgment calls taken out of the ref's hands as is possible. They botch them so often, I'd just rather eliminate subjectivity to whatever degree possible.

Wouldn't be so hard on the refs, but I agree it shouldn't be a judgement call, on something that can be so important, and also is so hard to spot whether or not a deliberate fumble occurred.

HJam72
12-06-2008, 08:41 PM
I don't think any team should ever be allowed to advance on a fumble. Don't fumble and you don't have to worry about it.