REALLY?? WHAT LOGIC please explain...........................
What happens if you fumble (out of bounds) just before the end zone like at the 1 yard line????? -Last team team with possession retains the ball =Correct
What happens if it goes just to the inside of the pylon and out of the end zone ??? The other Teams gets the ball at the 20yard line !!!!! Huge difference !! IMO
This just does not make any sense !! Period
If you fumble on the one inch line (or anywhere else on the field) and it goes out of bounds, who recovered it? No one. So the assumption is that possession does not go over.
Why, all the sudden, when you fumble it out of the endzone, is the assumption that the defense recovered? The only place on the field where lost possession is "auto-recovered" by the other team. It's ludicrous. For any other change of possession (besides going over on downs) the defense must SECURE possession from the offense.
If you're afraid of shenanigans on the goal line (players stretching out and just basically throwing the ball through the enzone), then make it a penalty. Delay of game or something, 5 yard penalty from spot of the fumble but keep the ball.
Why, all the sudden, when you fumble it out of the endzone, is the assumption that the defense recovered? The only place on the field where lost possession is "auto-recovered
That is where you are getting it twisted ....it doesnt assume the defense recovered it. It is more about the fact that YOU the runner lost possession out of the opponents end zone and the penalty for that is "ball at the 20 for the other team"
It is NOT out of bounds and your argument that the end zone is the same as out of bounds is causing you to f the logic from the get go.
Your premise is wrong to begin with so any arguments that follow are flawed.
That is where you are getting it twisted ....it doesnt assume the defense recovered it. It is more about the fact that YOU the runner lost possession out of the opponents end zone and the penalty for that is "ball at the 20 for the other team"
It is NOT out of bounds and your argument that the end zone is the same as out of bounds is causing you to f the logic from the get go.
Your premise is wrong to begin with so any arguments that follow are flawed.
Huh?
The enzone itself is obviously not out of bounds. That's not what I said. Out of bounds out of the endzone IS out of bounds. Which is why when a receiver catches the ball with one foot on the end line it is incomplete - cause he's out of bounds.
If a runner fumbles into the endzone, and it just sits there IN BOUNDS, it's just like any other fumble on the field of play. The defense has to recover it to secure possession. If it bounces OUT OF BOUNDS, you shouldn't assume the defense recovers, cause you don't do that anywhere else on the field.
If a player fumbles forward at the 2 and it is bounding towards the pylon, the result should not be so drastically different if it bounces in front of or behind the pylon on its way out of bounds. That makes zero sense.
If you just wanna say "there is extra consequence for fumbling it into and then out of the endzone, and I think it should be that way", then fine. But as written your post makes zero sense.
"Well the endzone is not out of bounds, so your entire premise is flawed"
Yeah no fucking shit it's not out of bounds
"Well the endzone is not out of bounds, so your entire premise is flawed"
Yeah no fucking shit it's not out of bounds
