QB forward progress?

[corncraze]

Ok so we all remember that bogus ruling from last week, well now Im watch the South Carolina vs Arkansas game and it was nearly the exact same thing? Whats the exact rules?

[JTrain]

Interesting... would like to see that one. The QB fumbled?

[lilred]

I saw this too... It makes no sense.

[JTrain]

So he fumbled but they called it down by forward progress? Did the announcers say anything?

[hskerprid]

Just like today when Helu was stripped. His forward progress was stopped but the refs didn't blow the whistle to stop the play then he gets stripped of the ball. Play should of been blown dead. Alot of bad calls today.

[brasky]

Just like today when Helu was stripped. His forward progress was stopped but the refs didn't blow the whistle to stop the play then he gets stripped of the ball. Play should of been blown dead. Alot of bad calls today.

 

I think if there would have been a clear enough view that play would have been overturned. It looked like his knee was down when the ISU player made the strip motion. It was just unfortunate that you couldn't clearly see the location of the ball when the knee was down. I'm pissed that their douchey coach got the call changed.

[irafreak]

Again why doesn't ABC/ESPN have cameras on both sidelines?

[corncraze]

Heres a quick story

 

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2010/11/6/1798389/arkansas-vs-south-carolina-scoring-update-missed-fg

 

could someone possibly find a highlight?

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Don't understand that rule at all.

 

Sidebar: I don't understand why Helu's forward progress wasn't stopped. IN FACT, if you see the ref, he was saying that Helu was down up to the point that the ISU actors (players) started making claims for the ball (which they did have)

 

He fumbled, but he was stopped long before that

[Enhance]

I found this snippet on wikipedia, but it sounds exactly like these are the two circumstances we have seen. And, according to this rule, both of these players were down by forward progress.

 

The runner's forward progress toward the opponents' goal line is stopped by contact with an opponent, with little chance to be resumed. The exact moment at which the player's forward progress stops is subject to the judgment of the officials. In particular, for the protection of the quarterback, he is considered down as soon as an official judges that he is in the grasp of an opponent behind the line of scrimmage, and the tackling defensive player(s) will be awarded with a sack. If he is driven backward by the opponent, the ball will be spotted where his forward progress was stopped.

 

So, by my interpretation, a quarterback's forward progress is up to the official watching him. As soon as a player hits him or is in his 'grasp', for the protection of the quarterback, he is deemed 'down' and thus a fumble doesn't count.

 

All this in perspective, I still don't understand it's exact use. I have seen quarterbacks take hits in the back field, fumble the ball, and have the defense pick it up. I've also seen that if a quarterback gets the ball knocked out while he is in his throwing motion and his arm ISN'T moving forward, then it's a fumble. So how is this rule interpreted? Why are some quarterbacks down by forward progress and others are not?

[knapplc]

This rule is stupid. It leaves fumbles entirely up to the decision of the referee, since EVERY SINGLE TIME a QB is sacked his forward progress is stopped. If that's the case, a QB should never be able to fumble. Ever.

[Enhance]

This rule is stupid. It leaves fumbles entirely up to the decision of the referee, since EVERY SINGLE TIME a QB is sacked his forward progress is stopped. If that's the case, a QB should never be able to fumble. Ever.

Exactly. To be honest, I don't ever remember seeing this rule used in a previous Husker game before this year, let a lone two games in one year in different conferences.

[dutch91701]

Just like today when Helu was stripped. His forward progress was stopped but the refs didn't blow the whistle to stop the play then he gets stripped of the ball. Play should of been blown dead. Alot of bad calls today.

 

I think if there would have been a clear enough view that play would have been overturned. It looked like his knee was down when the ISU player made the strip motion. It was just unfortunate that you couldn't clearly see the location of the ball when the knee was down. I'm pissed that their douchey coach got the call changed.

There could have been a clear view, but they wouldn't overturn it anyways.

[JTrain]

What a terrible, terrible rule.

[shyndy]

i dont think it counts when you are being hit by one guy and you are headed straight for the turf and the ball comes out immediately upon impact like it did with Gabbert. The thing that is messed up about some of these situations like with Helu is a couple of things. One, a defense should not be allowed to hold a player up while other players work at stripping the ball, pretty much impossible to keep the ball in that situation. But the reason that Helu's play wasn't blown dead is because he was still moving forward, even though it was because of both opposing players and teammates pushing him, which is also supposed to be aiding the runner but as we know that never gets called.