Replies

[Hit post instead of edit by mistake, admin moderator replace initial post if possible]

Last night Dallas, in the shadow of their own goal line through a pass which was completed at about the one yard line. A Seattle player knocked the ball out of the receiver's hands towards and into the endzone. It was initially ruled that the ball was recovered by Seattle before it went out of bounds and so it was a Seattle Touchdown. Upon video review the refs (and everyone else) saw that the ball went out of bounds before it was recovered, and so it was ruled a Safety, two points for Seattle.

Should this play have been ruled a touchback and Dallas given the ball on their 20 yard line?

The announcers, oblivious to everything not whispered into their ears by someone in the production truck, didn't consider this at all. (Just as they didn't consider whether Romo got a first down, or fumbled, after the botched field goal attempt.)

I did a little searching that would seem to suggest that the play should have been ruled a touchback.

The important factor in a safety is impetus. Two points are scored for the opposing team when the ball is dead on or behind a team's own goal line if the impetus came from a player on that team. Examples of Safety: (a) Blocked punt goes out of kicking team's end zone. Impetus was provided by punting team. The block only changes direction of ball, not impetus. http://www.footballbet.net/rules.html
Touchback: When a ball is dead on or behind a team’s own goal line, provided the impetus came from an opponent and provided it is not a touchdown or a missed field goal.http://football.calsci.com/TheRules2.html

I'm a Giants fan. I don't really care that much about who won the game. But rules are rules. Seattle got two points for that safety, and they won by one point.

ML/NJ

I like the conspiracy theory floating around Big D today....the ball that Romo dropped was greased! Yes! Greased!

Or.... the play that was ruled a safety had NEVER, EVER, EVER been called before last night. In the entire history of football. Home cooking for the Hawks....ROFL

THREW !!!

ping

Examples of Safety: (a) Blocked punt goes out of kicking team's end zone. Impetus was provided by punting team. The block only changes direction of ball, not impetus.

Your argument seems to hinge on the meaning of "impetus." If a blocked punt, which clearly changes the direction and destination of a ball can be considered to not change the "impetus" of the ball, then it is little different that a defensive player stripping an offensive player of the football likewise does not change its "impetus."

It makes little sense for a team who fumbles the ball out of their own end zone to be rewarded a touchback and a "do over" from better field position. Otherwise, this would be a common strategy.

Your opponent downs a punt on your 1 yard line? No problem, just fumble the ball out of bounds on your first play and resume with a new set of downs from your 20.

SD

I did not reject the definition that I cited. I explained how the play fell within it. You're fixating on definitions apart from the rules. We are not talking physics. We're talking football. The impetus was the FUMBLE, not the defensive man swiping at the ball. It is clearly identical to the punt YOU cited. In both cases, the ball was forced backwards by the actions of the defensive team, but possession was last held by the offense. In both cases the ball went out of bounds in the offensive team's end zone, with possession last being held by the offensive side. In both cases the result is a safety.

Why can't you understand such a simple concept?

Speaking of difficulty with the English language, the first example (not a rule, BTW) in your post no. 5 clearly indicates why the call was correct.