Tuck rule memories

[Delhomeboy]

Joking aside that notion is false, wasn't that game in 2001. Tom brady had barely made anything of himself.

Beat me to it.

The real repercussion of this ruling was that is seems to mark the moment at which you can track the Patriots' meteoric rise and the Raiders' calamitous fall, two things that haven't changed in ten freaking years. I'm not saying that the ruling causedthese two things, but for whatever reason, right after was when things went to heaven and hell respectively.

[sharkman]

You guys are forgetting the conspiracy against Al Davis part.

I've got to buy into this - be it Al Davis, or The Raiders in general.

Tom Brady wasn't "Tom Brady" yet in that game. That year/game was the beginning of the dynasty.

Either way, it's horrible rule, and I can't believe it's not been clarified or removed from the rule book yet. It was clearly a fumble to me.

[PhillyB]

i actually think the rule makes sense.

[carolinarolls]

i actually think the rule makes sense.

the spirit of the rule may but as it is applied and was applied in this one particular play it clearly has some flaws

[Donald LaFell]

yeah, that one was a lot more obvious though. cutler lost control of the ball when his arm was clearly going forward.

If culter was throwing the ball it was straight at the ground I think he was prepping for the hit. I say fumble.

this place is great that people remember calls from over 3 years ago haha

[Dpantherman]

I understand the rule, but was this not the first time the rule was called as it was in this instance?? Thats where the questions come out.

[Dpantherman]

[csx]

Because it was Tom Brady.

Tom Brady wasn't Tom Brady then...

[carolinarolls]

I have never seen a QB take a hit like that and it not be called a fumble before this play. It's still the worst call I have ever seen considering game situation and the playoffs bar none.

[csx]

It's a really bad rule, but it was called correctly IMO.

[carolinarolls]

It's a really bad rule, but it was called correctly IMO.

yeah, that's the sh-tty part about it

[weymouthst]

Two hands on the ball = fumble.

[Brooklyn Bully]

I don't get the rule at all.

You have the standard, "arm going forward = incomplete pass", rule which I do get. But the tuck rule is different. The rule says that the QB can decide to change his mind about passing once his arm goes forward, and tuck the ball. If at this moment the ball comes out, it's not a fumble. How does that make sense? You have to first decide his intent. But then the QB gets some sort of fumble protection? Nonsense.

[Cat Fanboy]

My question is that if they rule incomplete pass why not throw the flag for intentional grounding? There wasn't any receivers in the area thats for sure.