Can We Discuss Goodson Fumble Please

[Mother Grabber]

The good thing is that this did happen in a preseason game so that he can learn from it. He'll get coached to tuck that ball in and protect it, rather than stick it out for all the world to smack it away. Good timing. Once he gets that fixed, he'll be a great addition.

[outlaw4]

So let’s take a hypothetical … DeAngelo takes a handoff from Jake and sprints around right end. The LB comes up and hits him low, knocking him off balance. DW manages to get his left hand down to regain his balance and takes 82 yards for an apparent TD.

Who's going to stand up yelling at the top of their lungs “BRING IT BACK, HIS HAND WAS DOWN !!!” ?

I've seen the situation described above before and I don't recall a time where the hand that had the ball coming down so that's part of the confusion.

There are some fans who still don’t understand the rule on Smitty’s non-catch from the Dallas game a couple years ago even though, I believe it was Mike Carey, so eloquently explained the review.

It's not so much that but the fact that on the prior drive, there was a BLATANT pass interference he didn't bother to call it, yet, he went out of his way to explain why Smitty didn't get the catch on the next drive. To say that I didn't feel slighted (or robbed) that night by Carey would be a lie.

The "exception" is what I find ridiculous

I understand your feet because your feet is already on the ground, but your hand isnt. To say the forearm isnt a exception but the wrist is, thats ridiculous

I can't imagine the forearm hitting the ground without not having either the elbow or hand come down as well. Phil Dees hypothetical is a good example of why the runner isn't down with only the hand.

To be fair with Goodson, how often does a runner fall like that? That, and Rosario was pushed out of the way by #36 (a sub-200 lb corner pushing a 250ish man out of the way!) before Johnson tackled Goodson which caused the fumble.

[mountainpantherfan]

As for the challenge by Coach Coughlin, a player in possession of the ball is considered to be down when any part of his body other than his hands or feet touch the ground. As the only part of the Carolina runner that touched the ground was his hand, he was considered still “up” and therefore he fumbled a live ball. This is the one exception to the rule that the “ground can not cause a fumble.

Here is why I have a problem with this explanation and the call; I always believed that one of the rules stated that if the BALL touches the ground that the play is dead and thus the reason that the ground can not cause a fumble.

The example of Williams getting hit and then placing his hand down is correct but if he were to use the ball to steady himself then he would be down. Or at least that was how I always understood the rules.

[Peppa Jack Supreme]

I couldnt get over Trico and Gruden, "So let me get this straight, the back of the hand isnt part of the body??"

[megadeth078]

I couldnt get over Trico and Gruden, "So let me get this straight, the back of the hand isnt part of the body??"

that quote just shows their ignorance. The rule clearly states that hands are an exception. It was a textbook fumble. It sucks, I know.

[Seamonk]

that quote just shows their ignorance. The rule clearly states that hands are an exception. It was a textbook fumble. It sucks, I know.

I don't think they were talking about the rule.. They were talking about how rediculous it is that a body part isn't part of the body. More of a word thing..

[N'wahlinsCayenne]

The "exception" is what I find ridiculous

I understand your feet because your feet is already on the ground, but your hand isnt. To say the forearm isnt a exception but the wrist is, thats ridiculous

Like an earlier poster said, so if D-Will gets hit by a defender and it causes him to put one hand down to balance his body and start running again, you're gonna say he shoulda been down?

[mountainpantherfan]

Like an earlier poster said, so if D-Will gets hit by a defender and it causes him to put one hand down to balance his body and start running again, you're gonna say he shoulda been down?

If it was the hand that was carrying the ball and the ball touched the ground as well then yes he should have been down. At least that is how I always understood the rules.

[nosuchthingasapanther]

this thread has more whining in it than the thread about gamble getting plowed by bradshaw.

[Kettle]

the rule should say palms instead of hands

[beastson]

If it was the hand that was carrying the ball and the ball touched the ground as well then yes he should have been down. At least that is how I always understood the rules.

Yea yall talking about a hand without the ball used to keep balance

Switch it, does that argument work? No cause most likely if your hand touch the ground, the ball does too. Which means you're down

[nosuchthingasapanther]

Yea yall talking about a hand without the ball used to keep balance

Switch it, does that argument work? No cause most likely if your hand touch the ground, the ball does too. Which means you're down

but the ball never touched the ground, and that's why it's a fumble.

[jasonluckydog]

When my balls touch the ground I know im in big trouble.

[Zcustom]

regardless of how you feel about that play you have to admit some really strange plays/calls always seem to happen to the panthers. Remember the league actually changed the rule on a defender recovering a fumble and going into the endzone being a safety after the Faclons game several years ago.

Wierd. Wild. Stuff