Jump to content

They need to change the getting out of bounds rule


abenjami

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

T79 is 100% correct about the reasoning and how it's applied. The idea of forward progress is the essence. A player can go forward and then voluntarily give ground (including laterals). His forward progress follows his trajectory and not the farthest place he moved forward.

 

As was noted, if a ball carrier gets stacked up on a toss play and gets the first down but is pushed out of bounds by the defense, do you say the play was stopped in bounds or that the ball is placed where he went out of bounds? 

 

The rule makes sense for the purpose of allowing forward progress. 

 

It's super easy to just say you get forward progress but the clock stops when you go out of bounds.

 

They don't have to be linked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 39
  • Created
  • Last Reply

There are all sorts of interpretations and rules like this that people just accept. There's never a great reason why one thing or another is picked and the sport would function just fine with an alternate choice.

 

One foot versus two feet, knees and elbows count as feet ... why not allow someone a catch as long as both feet were in bounds the last time they touched before possession was established ... why allow someone to get back up if they fall down on their own without being touched ... the tuck rule itself ... protecting a sliding QB ... why do half the distance to the goal instead of the one inch line ... when and why do you get a down back after a penalty ... there are all sorts of decision points that aren't truly inherently better than alternatives - you just have to pick one and then people get used to them. Sometimes you need to change (kickoff rules, for instance) but most of the time it just becomes how things are forever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, titans79 said:

Forward progress stopped inbounds means the play is stopped, inbounds. I feel like it kind of is linked, and needs to be.

 

 

 

Sport rules are all arbitrary to a point, but for consistency sake it seems pretty obvious this is the right way. Also keep in mind forward progress is a player health benefit of sorts, as when a player's forward progression seems to have likely been achieved the refs will call a play dead. Letting it extend seems counter to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, BlueThunder said:

SF running back broke off a long run, but ran out of bounds or Dallas never would have touched the ball again.

If he'd jumped backwards then all would have been fine...

which is stupid. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, titanruss said:

If he'd jumped backwards then all would have been fine... which is stupid

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is incorrect. Forward progress is not granted if someone goes back on their own. Therefore, it would not be a factor in such an instance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand, with a lead and a desire to run down the clock, ball-carriers are taught to go down in-bounds whether or not they slide while defenders are trying to get them out of bounds to stop the clock rather than tackle them in-bounds where it will keep running.

 

Next up.... Intentional Grounding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, way off topic, and I get why it's there, but imo the way delay of game is enforced, is the dumbest penalty in football. "Let's pause the game, to enforce a delay of game." Again, I get it, but how many times is this called as the ball is being snapped? It just seems contradictory at times

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...