Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Question re: Stewart fumble play


Montsta

Recommended Posts

I was drinking and can't recall when it happened, but the play where Stew fumbled near the sidelines after getting a first down, but was then recovered behind the first down marker so it was called as a 3rd down and we punted. My question is could Rivera have challenged that Stewart was actually out of bounds when he recovered the ball, so it should have been ruled down at the spot of the fumble so it would have been a first? Does anybody know the rule on this?

My bad if this has already been discussed/mentioned in some other thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was drinking and can't recall when it happened, but the play where Stew fumbled near the sidelines after getting a first down, but was then recovered behind the first down marker so it was called as a 3rd down and we punted. My question is could Rivera have challenged that Stewart was actually out of bounds when he recovered the ball, so it should have been ruled down at the spot of the fumble so it would have been a first? Does anybody know the rule on this?

My bad if this has already been discussed/mentioned in some other thread.

would have been a penalty on Stewart which would have pushed us backwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They overturned a NE touchdown bc of an illegal touch during a standard scoring review this year.

what would happen in this case though since it wasn't a scoring play? i don't know if it'd be ball placed at the spot of the touch in light of the illegal touch seen in the replay or ball placed at the spot of the fumble because there wasn't a "clear recovery" in the sense of an eligible player recovering the ball when the play was whistled dead on the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's what I was wondering when I first saw it too...if the illegal touching was called...would they overturn the recovery and give the ball at that spot to the Hawks or just add on the penalty. Not sure if I remember that happening before...but then...my memory card is full and slow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect Rivera didn't want to challenge because the replay would have revealed that Stewart didn't re-establish himself in bounds before recovering the fumble...

mmmm..... doubtful... I don't believe Rivera would be smart enough to think that way. He was probably texting at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what would happen in this case though since it wasn't a scoring play? i don't know if it'd be ball placed at the spot of the touch in light of the illegal touch seen in the replay or ball placed at the spot of the fumble because there wasn't a "clear recovery" in the sense of an eligible player recovering the ball when the play was whistled dead on the field.

This scenario is exactly what intrigued me regarding this play. There are so many odd rules in the NFL I like to discuss ones I don't know or understand so that I feel like I have a better grasp/knowledge of the game. And the threads here have all been kill the FO threads so I thought if someone could provide some intelligent insight that'd be pretty cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I don’t think people are saying that picking up the option s a call for the pitchforks. We would have had to do things differently a couple of years back to make declining the option a valid move. We didn’t and here we are. People largely accept that. The patter it adheres to, reinforces the nausea we feel when the idea of an extension, and at top of the market no less, comes up.  One that he hasn’t shown he deserves.   Same as he did not deserve to be drafted 1.1. Look at Pavia and what really is the difference? Bryce is a nice guy and Pavia is an asshole lol. They are both no margin for error non day one talents. One went undrafted.  
    • We hate losing. I don't know Bryce to hate him. His play as a QB, I absolutely hate. It's just not good enough. If there were a lottery held to select the order and all 32 starting QBs could be drafted as the starting QB for whatever team selected them, how long do you think it would be before Bryce's name was called? Top 10, top 20, bottom 8? Think about it.  For me, having never seen back to back games with franchise QB level performance in 3 years tells me what I need to know. We still need to be looking for our solution at QB.     
    • Dude, I'm saying the Cardinals have proven they know nothing. Not saying keeping Bryce is the best choice long term, just saying that we've made the right move for this moment in time.  But man, the Cardinals are never a blueprint for success. Haven't been since they were in Chicago.
×
×
  • Create New...