Was Sammy's TD really a TD or was it a fumble?

[gebobs]

Not sure how much of a "massive break" it was, considering it still would have been 16-10 and the Dols didn't score the rest of the game, while the Bills tacked-on another 6 points.

Of course. No one's sure about that despite the fact the Dollies never scored again. Momentum is intangible. Could have swung either way and chances are as good if not better that it would have swung south.

[Goobylal]

Of course. No one's sure about that despite the fact the Dollies never scored again. Momentum is intangible. Could have swung either way and chances are as good if not better that it would have swung south.

The mo' was never leaving the Bills. Not on that day.

But it's moot since it was, in fact, a TD.

[gebobs]

The mo' was never leaving the Bills. Not on that day.

Delivered with conviction, if only without basis.

But it's moot since it was, in fact, a TD.

I see. So how some situation was ruled determines its reality.

The idea that OJ Simpson is a murderer is moot since he was never, in fact, convicted.

[Figster]

"Touched the pylon" is irrelevant in this case. The only time touching the pylon matters is if you touch the front of the pylon, as it represents the front plane of the end zone. In Sammy's case, the whole ball was inside the end zone and it touched the pylon from within the end zone. The play was a touchdown the moment the first part of the ball crossed the plane of the goal line, not when it touched the pylon. The ball appeared to come out of his hand after it had crossed the plane.

I agree, the pylon is a vertical representation of where the goal line starts and the goalline is already crossed when you hit the side of it.

I also believe the actual fumble doesn't start taking place until it the football loses contact with hand.

[gebobs]

I also believe the actual fumble doesn't start taking place until it the football loses contact with hand.

So it's not a fumble so long as the player still has part of his hand just touching the ball?

[mercyrule]

TD

did they give us six points?

[Goobylal]

Delivered with conviction, if only without basis.

There is more basis for my statement than thinking the mo' was suddenly, and inexplicably, going to shift in the Dols' favor.

I see. So how some situation was ruled determines its reality.

The idea that OJ Simpson is a murderer is moot since he was never, in fact, convicted.

No, it has nothing to do with how it was ruled/ Although that corroborates what I saw considering it was called that way initially and then reviewed and upheld.

So it's not a fumble so long as the player still has part of his hand just touching the ball?

Okay, let's start with the basics. How is a TD scored? We'll go from there.

[bf1]

I think it was a fumble. Honestly I don't know how it didn't get overturned.

[gebobs]

There is more basis for my statement than thinking the mo' was suddenly, and inexplicably, going to shift in the Dols' favor.

More delivery with conviction and with the same amount of basis.

Although not quite as sure as death and taxes, momentum shifts happen in football all of the time.

Last week, the Giants had dug themselves out of a 10-0 hole and lead 14-10 going into the 4th quarter. The offense was looking effective. The defense was smothering the Cards. The crowd was energized. Then Ted Ginn returns a punt to the house, the Giants cough up the ensuing kickoff, and turn the ball over twice on subsequent drives.

Did you see the Packers-Jets game? The momentum shifts there was palpable. The crowd and the home team were in shock after Rodgers fumbled on the first play and all appeared lost after the Jets scored TDs on their first three possessions. I had the Packers in Survivor. I thought I was done. Then the Jets were driving for a fourth TD deep in Packer territory and Geno throws a pick. The crowd goes ape**** and the Jets get shutout going away.

The Niners were rolling along 17-0 when Cutler executes a nice two-minute drill to get a score in just before the half ends. Kaepernick has one drive for a FG in the second half and then starts tossing picks which the Bears convert into TDs. Game over.

Okay, let's start with the basics. How is a TD scored? We'll go from there.

All I was looking for was some clarification of dog's post which said a "fumble doesn't start taking place until ... the football loses contact with hand."

I think I can handle the basics of football, but thanks.

[Meathead]

I also believe the actual fumble doesn't start taking place until it the football loses contact with hand.

well we know this is not correct but trying to get clarification on what exactly is a fumble by looking up the rules wasnt any help at all. i tried looking online for the official definition of an nfl fumble and the results were surprisingly vague. all i could find are relatively generic explanations about losing control that dont talk any specifics about hands on the ball, etc

the best i could find is this from the nfl guide for statisticians:

A fumble is an act (other than pass or kick) that results in a player's loss of possession of the ball or his failure to handle a ball which has been properly centered to him. Exceptions: No fumble shall be charged (a) on an attempted point-after-touchdown, or (b) on a momentary bobble of the ball at the point of reception if in the scorer’s judgment the bobble had no effect on the continuing action, provided that the ball has not touched the ground or another player.
http://www.nflgsis.com/gsis/document...tisticians.pdf

not much help

but by watching a gajillion replays we can tell how refs generally interpret a fumble. as soon as the ball starts turning in his hands its a fumble. we see this when a carriers knee is two inches from the ground but if the ball has started moving and then comes loose after the knee touches its still a fumble. so you can have two hands around the ball and if its made to turn by something other than his own hands then its the start of a fumble. he must then regain control before it stops being a fumble

now the question is what is 'control'? frankly im not sure. we know a player can control the ball with one hand, you can run into the endzone with the ball raised in one hand and its still a td. but when exactly does it transition to control when you only have one hand on the ball?

i would think that definition should NOT include a scoop or a cradle where the ball isnt really being gripped, its just being held in the hand by gravity or centrifugal force, which appears to be the case here

but without a firm definition of exactly what control really is, we are pretty much screwed out of getting a definitive answer

[gebobs]

now the question is what is 'control'? frankly im not sure. we know a player can control the ball with one hand, you can run into the endzone with the ball raised in one hand and its still a td. but when exactly does it transition to control when you only have one hand on the ball?

i would think that definition should NOT include a scoop or a cradle where the ball isnt really being gripped, its just being held in the hand by gravity or centrifugal force, which appears to be the case here

but without a firm definition of exactly what control really is, we are pretty much screwed out of getting a definitive answer

To paraphrase Potter Stewart: I shall not today attempt further to define a fumble; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it."

[stuckincincy]

To paraphrase Potter Stewart: I shall not today attempt further to define a fumble; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it."

[Figster]

well we know this is not correct but trying to get clarification on what exactly is a fumble by looking up the rules wasnt any help at all. i tried looking online for the official definition of an nfl fumble and the results were surprisingly vague. all i could find are relatively generic explanations about losing control that dont talk any specifics about hands on the ball, etc

the best i could find is this from the nfl guide for statisticians:

A fumble is an act (other than pass or kick) that results in a player's loss of possession of the ball or his failure to handle a ball which has been properly centered to him. Exceptions: No fumble shall be charged (a) on an attempted point-after-touchdown, or (b) on a momentary bobble of the ball at the point of reception if in the scorer’s judgment the bobble had no effect on the continuing action, provided that the ball has not touched the ground or another player.
http://www.nflgsis.com/gsis/document...tisticians.pdf

not much help

but by watching a gajillion replays we can tell how refs generally interpret a fumble. as soon as the ball starts turning in his hands its a fumble. we see this when a carriers knee is two inches from the ground but if the ball has started moving and then comes loose after the knee touches its still a fumble. so you can have two hands around the ball and if its made to turn by something other than his own hands then its the start of a fumble. he must then regain control before it stops being a fumble

now the question is what is 'control'? frankly im not sure. we know a player can control the ball with one hand, you can run into the endzone with the ball raised in one hand and its still a td. but when exactly does it transition to control when you only have one hand on the ball?

i would think that definition should NOT include a scoop or a cradle where the ball isnt really being gripped, its just being held in the hand by gravity or centrifugal force, which appears to be the case here

but without a firm definition of exactly what control really is, we are pretty much screwed out of getting a definitive answer

clearly you have to lose posession of the ball before it becomes a fumble. If its in your hand and your holding it, wouldn't the actual speration from the hand determine when its a fumble?

[Goobylal]

More delivery with conviction and with the same amount of basis.

Although not quite as sure as death and taxes, momentum shifts happen in football all of the time.

Last week, the Giants had dug themselves out of a 10-0 hole and lead 14-10 going into the 4th quarter. The offense was looking effective. The defense was smothering the Cards. The crowd was energized. Then Ted Ginn returns a punt to the house, the Giants cough up the ensuing kickoff, and turn the ball over twice on subsequent drives.

Did you see the Packers-Jets game? The momentum shifts there was palpable. The crowd and the home team were in shock after Rodgers fumbled on the first play and all appeared lost after the Jets scored TDs on their first three possessions. I had the Packers in Survivor. I thought I was done. Then the Jets were driving for a fourth TD deep in Packer territory and Geno throws a pick. The crowd goes ape**** and the Jets get shutout going away.

The Niners were rolling along 17-0 when Cutler executes a nice two-minute drill to get a score in just before the half ends. Kaepernick has one drive for a FG in the second half and then starts tossing picks which the Bears convert into TDs. Game over.

Your basis is 1 game out of 32 where the team had the momentum the entire game until the 4th quarter? Okay. We'll just agree to disagree. Never mind that the Dols only got to within 6 points because of yet another missed false start.

All I was looking for was some clarification of dog's post which said a "fumble doesn't start taking place until ... the football loses contact with hand."

I think I can handle the basics of football, but thanks.

It wasn't a fumble because the ball crossed the vertical plane of the goal line first. Once it does that, the play is over, a TD is scored, and anything that comes after it is immaterial.

[gebobs]

Your basis is 1 game out of 32 where the team had the momentum the entire game until the 4th quarter?

No, three games out of 16. Momentum shifts happen regularly. QED.

Baseless assertions such as "The momentum of the game was never going to shift in the Dolphins favor" mean nothing.

Never mind that the Dols only got to within 6 points because of yet another missed false start.

The officials are part of the game just like everything else and certainly can influence momentum.

It wasn't a fumble because the ball crossed the vertical plane of the goal line first. Once it does that, the play is over, a TD is scored, and anything that comes after it is immaterial.

No kidding. The question is what happened BEFORE the ball hit the pylon. Specifically, did Watkins have control of the ball. There is no objective fact to the matter. I'm not sure Watkins knows. But there is enough to be seen from the replay to introduce some doubt.

We all know how it was ruled and we all know that the ruling was upheld. IMHO, the replay officials made the right call...no incontrovertible evidence to overturn. And forget about the officials on the field. If we can't say definitively one way or the other after looking at the replay again and again in slow motion, it's unlikely that they had a better view seeing it once at full speed.

[gebobs]

clearly you have to lose posession of the ball before it becomes a fumble. If its in your hand and your holding it, wouldn't the actual speration from the hand determine when its a fumble?

Not exactly. What if when Spiller was showboating on his return TD, instead he decided to hold the ball out in front of himself as he crossed the 10 yard line, palm up. To the horror of Bills fans watching, we see the ball begin to roll off his hand. Replays show clearly that as the ball breaks the plane, it is perched precariously on the tip of his middle finger.

Though the ball is still touching his hand, does he have possession? No, I think not.

[stuckincincy]

Not exactly. What if when Spiller was showboating on his return TD, instead he decided to hold the ball out in front of himself as he crossed the 10 yard line, palm up. To the horror of Bills fans watching, we see the ball begin to roll off his hand. Replays show clearly that as the ball breaks the plane, it is perched precariously on the tip of his middle finger.

Though the ball is still touching his hand, does he have possession? No, I think not.

I suppose. But wouldn't be dumb to call such a fumble? Grind down a fine effort down to such a lever - find fault at the atomic level?

[Buffalogic]

It was a fumble and should have been a touchback. But it wasn't called that way so it is a touchdown and it will always be a touchdown. Good job Sammy, just hold onto the ball a weeeee bit longer.

[Goobylal]

No, three games out of 16. Momentum shifts happen regularly. QED.

Baseless assertions such as "The momentum of the game was never going to shift in the Dolphins favor" mean nothing.

The officials are part of the game just like everything else and certainly can influence momentum.

Okay, it was highly unlikely to shift. Based on just (alright, I'll give you) 3 out of 32 games.

No kidding. The question is what happened BEFORE the ball hit the pylon. Specifically, did Watkins have control of the ball. There is no objective fact to the matter. I'm not sure Watkins knows. But there is enough to be seen from the replay to introduce some doubt.

We all know how it was ruled and we all know that the ruling was upheld. IMHO, the replay officials made the right call...no incontrovertible evidence to overturn. And forget about the officials on the field. If we can't say definitively one way or the other after looking at the replay again and again in slow motion, it's unlikely that they had a better view seeing it once at full speed.

He definitely had control of it. After Grimes jarred it loose, he trapped the ball against his chest and then extended it to get it over the goalline. Without control of it, the ball doesn't go exactly where his hand goes. And had it been ruled a fumble, I'd have challenged and expected it to be overturned because the ball traveled with his hand as he extended it.

[gebobs]

Okay, it was highly unlikely to shift. Based on just (alright, I'll give you) 3 out of 32 games.

LOL...I just picked three games that had good examples. There are momentum shifts of varying magnitude in every game. Are you even more clueless about football than politics? Is it possible?

Anyone that has ever played or watched the game knows that momentum is key and games swing on it all the time. To assert that some particular game, your game, is somehow immune to that reality is mere had waving. That's sort of par for the course for you so not so surprising.

He definitely had control of it. After Grimes jarred it loose, he trapped the ball against his chest and then extended it to get it over the goalline. Without control of it, the ball doesn't go exactly where his hand goes. And had it been ruled a fumble, I'd have challenged and expected it to be overturned because the ball traveled with his hand as he extended it.

You seem to think that strongly asserting opinions makes them fact. You should be a preacher.