THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

Agree, but that’s still a rule that needs to be looked at. What’s to keep a player from batting a backward pass toward the line of scrimmage, but out of bounds? I know it’s chancy and would be rare, but I remember the famous fumble play the Oakland Raiders pulled off that got that rule changed in the NFL.

First of all, since it was backwards it is called a lateral which is a live ball and a fumble. If it were forward, it would be an incomplete pass and a dead ball when it hit the ground.

1/Dana, as for players intentionally fumbling forward there are two rules. One, in certain situations late in the game (I’m not sure the exact rules, and they may be different between NFL and college, but something like last 4 minutes in the 4th quarter) only the fumbling player can advance the ball with a recovery. If it goes out of bounds or is recovered/advanced by a teammate, the ball comes back to the spot of the fumble. This is a rule that I believe dates back to a famous Ken Stabler play when he was with the Raiders and fumbled on purpose late in the game which was recovered for a game-winning TD. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roller_(American_football)

Second, the refs can call Illegal Batting if they believe a player intentionally batted the ball forward. In this case, it looks incidental so it was not called.

Monte is correct about the interpretation of the rule. A backwards or horizontal pass is considered a lateral and is a live ball whether or not it is caught.

In the NFL, the “only the fumbling player may advance the ball” rule also applies on 4th down throughout the entire game. Thus had this same situation happened in the NFL, possession would change to the defensive team from the spot the QB threw the ball. A similar play happened yesterday in the Cowboys-Rams game:

“4th and 4 at STL 40 - A.Feeley sacked at SL 34 for -6 yards (D.Ware). FUMBLES (D.Ware), recovered by SL-Jason.Brown at SL 39. Jason.Brown to SL 39 for no gain (D.Ware).”

“1st and 10 at STL 34 - [Cowboys ball]”

The play began at the 40 yardline before Ware stripped-sacked Feely at the 34. A different St. Louis player recovered the ball at the 39; however because it was 4th down the ball went back to the spot of the fumble (the 34), and because the Rams did not convert the Cowboys were awarded possession. Thus the Cowboys get the ball at the 34.

Thanks for the clarifications.  I didn’t write it well.

I guess a better way I could have described it is that it should be treated the same as a handoff to the RB or a bad snap by the QB, and when the ball-holder fumbles without having first possession, then the direction of the bounce is irrelevant.

I presume the “can’t fumble forward” was to prevent someone from having possession of the ball and then “accidently” shoving the ball forward out of bounds for extra yards.

Did I explain that better?

4/Yep, you got it. A clean rule until they had to add in the Stabler exception.

3/James, thanks for the clarification, didn’t know the NFL had the 4th down rule for the whole game.

Tango, you are correct. The direction the ball bounced does not effect whether or not the play will be ruled a fumble or an incomplete pass. However in this situation it DOES matter as far as determining where the ball should be spotted, which was important in this case as the spot determined which team would have possession of the ball. As I said above the NFL has a rule that would prevent the bounce from mattering in this situation, but apparently the NCAA does not.

You’re also correct about the “can’t fumble forward” part of the rule, which went into the rule book after the Raiders intentionally fumbled the ball into the endzone with 10 seconds left in the game. (Monte tried to link to the Wikipedia article but the last parenthesis was cut out of the link).

Finally, I disagree with the announcers’ explanation of a difference between a backward pass vs a fumble (around 1:40 in the video), but I don’t know the intricacies of the NCAA rules and maybe they are correct. I don’t believe there is a distinction between the two in the NFL.

Actually, although the ruling was correct, it seems like people are not understanding why it was correct.  The key point for this ruling is that this is not a fumble, it is a “muff”. 

So here are the relevant rules:
(1) A fumble is when a player with possession loses possession (without intentionally doing so by passing, punting, etc.).
(2) A muff is when a player touches the ball in an attempt to receive a kick, punt or backwards pass, but never establishes possession.
(3) A backwards pass is a pass that first touches the ground or a player behind the point where it is released.
(4) A muff does not change the status of the ball (e.g., a backwards pass does not stop being a backwards pass when muffed).
(5) A backwards pass that goes out of bounds is marked at the spot where it goes out of bounds.
(6) A fumble that goes out of bounds forward of the spot of the fumble is marked where it was fumbled, not where it goes out of bounds.

So because this was a muffed backwards pass, it was correctly marked at the spot where it went out of bounds.  If it had been a forward fumble, it would have been marked back at the spot of the fumble.

Very few announcers or fans seem to grasp the distinction between a fumble and a muff.  It’s an important distinction to officials, though, and this play shows why it is important to know the difference.  Whether it makes any sense for this distinction to exist is another question, I suppose.