The illegal touching/fumble call

[Blackshirtsguru]

I went and looked up the rule because I was very confused on what the refs came up with for the call.

 

 

Illegal Touching

3. End A88 goes out of bounds and returns inbounds before catching a legal

forward pass. He went out of bounds (a) on his own; (b) because B44 pushed him out.

RULING: (a) Foul for illegal touching. Loss of down at the previous spot. (b) Legal play

and a completed pass.

If this is correct....our receiver ran out of bounds on his own and came back in play to catch the ball. According to the rule it should have been called illegal touching and loss of down at the previous spot. He wasn't forced out so the play shouldn't have counted at all!

 

Unless I am seeing something different.

[walksalone]

something about that didn't seem kosher...

[Dr. Mantis Toboggan]

Is the opposing team able to accept or decline that penalty?

[jcsmhammel]

We fumbled the ball so they declined the penalty

[Blackshirtsguru]

Is the opposing team able to accept or decline that penalty?

It didn't get into that...I am hoping that is the case and we didn't get screwed because of a botched rule call.

[shyndy]

They didn't say it but the penalty was declined

[Dr. Strangelove]

 

Is the opposing team able to accept or decline that penalty?

It didn't get into that...I am hoping that is the case and we didn't get screwed because of a botched rule call.

 

We got a very poor roughing call go our way right before that.

 

They were just better than us today.

[BigWillie]

Penalty doesn't make the play dead from the spot of the foul. Minnesota could have accepted the penalty, and we would have kept the ball. But that wouldn't make alot of sense.

 

The same applies to every other penalty. If a penalty occurs during a turnover, the team who turned it over doesn't get the option to keep the ball.

[BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA]

It's not A and B, it's A or B. He wasn't forced out so B wasn't an option and it wouldn't be a catch. If no catch, there can't be a fumble.

[Scratchtown]

It's not A and B, it's A or B. He wasn't forced out so B wasn't an option and it wouldn't be a catch. If no catch, there can't be a fumble.

That's wrong.

[Blackshirtsguru]

It's not A and B, it's A or B. He wasn't forced out so B wasn't an option and it wouldn't be a catch. If no catch, there can't be a fumble.

That is exactly how I read it

[BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA]

 

It's not A and B, it's A or B. He wasn't forced out so B wasn't an option and it wouldn't be a catch. If no catch, there can't be a fumble.

That's wrong.

 

expand on that

[VA Husker Fan]

It's not A and B, it's A or B. He wasn't forced out so B wasn't an option and it wouldn't be a catch. If no catch, there can't be a fumble.

It wasn't a legal catch, but it was still a catch and Minnesota had the option to decline the penalty and let the play stand.

[grandpasknee]

That penalty should not have had any effect on us winning or losing. It is just a possible excuse at this point. If we adjust during the game, like other teams do, we win by 28 and that penalty is meaningless.

[VA Husker Fan]

That penalty should not have had any effect on us winning or losing. It is just a possible excuse at this point. If we adjust during the game, like other teams do, we win by 28 and that penalty is meaningless.

Thanks Grandpa, but some people like to actually make sure the game follows the rules, or at least get clarification on the rules. I'm sure there will be a bunch of other threads where you can talk about failure to adjust.