In the BC vs Sask semi-final, BC fumbled (Logan) the ball on Sasks 1yard line the ball went into the end zone and was recovered by BC(Paris Jackson),touchdown right ...WRONG,they reviewed the play,after the review the Ref and command centre said "the ball was not immediantly recovered by BC so BC ball on 1 yard line". this makes no sence whatsoever and is as far as I can tell is a made up rule,what your telling me is if Sask recovers that ball in the endzone its still BC ball on the 1 yard line.Where did this rule come from.The commentator from TSN (Cuthburt) made the same referrance when Durrant fumbled the ball in the Grey cup game.What is immediate,how do you people define immediate,please direct to the section in the rule book with that in it.thanks, very confused.
Immediate recovery is up to the officials discretion. If you want my opinion, they made the wrong call in the BC game, and the right call yesterday in the Grey Cup. When you leave a rule up to an officials discretion, or the command centre's discretion, you're going to get inconsistencies.
The only thing they got wrong on yesterday's fumble was it was borderline loose ball interference as the Hamilton defender grabs Durant by the leg and tries to pull him away from the ball
As I stated on another thread about this call, Offence cannot fumble into the opponents end zone and recover the fumble, the goal line is considered a boundary line. It happened in a game in Hamilton a few years ago, I thought it was a TD then , but it makes sense that you cannot forward the ball to a team mate across the goal line, if you could teams would do it all the time, IE forward lateral!
pretty risky fumbling the ball on a designed play to kick it around for awhile and think your 100% sure your going to recover it.
so is it dead ball? if Sask recovers ball its still BC ball?????I think not. made up rule.
Given the following excerpt from the statistics chapter of the 2011 CFL Rule Book, it appears that fumbling forward into the endzone is legal.
[b]STATISTICAL SCORING RULES SECTION 11 – FUMBLES[/b] (g) When a player fumbles the ball and it is recovered by another player of the same team, the continuing action shall be regarded as part of the same play leading up to the fumble.
(2) Team A has the ball on Team B’s 30-yard line. Team A quarterback throws a pass to the Team A receiver, who carries the ball to the Team B five-yard line and fumbles. The ball continues on into the Team B End Zone where it is fallen on by a Team A player.
NOTE – Team A quarterback is credited with a completed TD pass for 30 yards. The receiver is credited with a catch for 30 yards but no TD. The Team A player who recovered the ball is credited with a TD receiving but with no catch or yards.
The ruling by the Command Centre on that play was not that the fumble forward into the endzone was not allowed and the ball would be placed at the one yard line, it was that the ball was not recovered immediately. As I stated on that same thread, the ruling may have been based on a synchronization problem between the video and audio, with the whistle being heard a full two seconds before the official is seen blowing it (literally and figuratively) in the background. If the Command Centre did not notice this lag between the audio and the video, they would have thought that four seconds had lapsed between the whistle and the recovery of the fumble, hardly immediate.
Perhaps what took the Command Centre so long with this week's ruling was trying to actually hear the whistle in order to determine whether the recovery was immediate or not. With the crowd noise, it would have been rather difficult.
Then they got it wrong in my example, I didn't agree at the time. The league needs to do some rule updates !!!
If you're talking about the fumble into the endzone in the Lions-Riders game, I think you are correct that the Command Centre got the call wrong. But I think that was due to a technical glitch in the video feed, and not because they got the rule wrong.
But yes, the rule book does need to be cleaned up. The fact that I couldn't find any reference to a team recovering its own fumble in the endzone except in a vague reference in the statistics (and this isn't the only case of this) tells me that the rules need to be better defined.
Lions got screwed that’s supposed to be our Grey Cup. Enjoy it Riders, karmas bringing another 20 years of misery lol
BC scored on the play anyway,it just seems bush league.I remember seeing plays not that long ago a fumble and each team would touch,kick fumble again for 20- 30 seconds finally falling on it. CFL( Confused Football League)
The Lions scored on the next play. Are you saying they lost because of the few extra seconds that next play took?
Was that after the play was whistled dead? And was it before the video replay review rules were introduced?
I've played football,coached football,watched football both leagues NFL,CFL. for 40 years and thats still the worst call I've seen in awhilethey still got it wrong even with video replay.
Not even CLOSE to being the worst and the call isn't the problem, the rule is the problem. Given the rule, it was called correctly.
Yes you can fumble the ball forward into the endzone and recover it for a TD. 2006 regular season, Lions at Riders, Joesph fumbles at the 8 yard line ball rolls deep into endzone, Fantuz falls on it for his first career TD. It is only the referee's discretion of whether the ball was deliberately propelled forward or not. I don't agree with this rule but it is the rule nonetheless.
The NFL does however have a rule to prevent this.
But to take the discussion to a whole new level, the 'immediately recovered' deal has to do with quick whistles and replay, which is a whole new complication that I simply detest. And to mess this up far further, the replay booth has been hopelessly inconsistent in applying this rule all year. And this bothers me to no end. Don't get me started.