Quote:
Originally Posted by Reffing Rev.
I'm not so sure I agree, I'm still on the fence on this one. Here is how I'm thinking: when the ball left the end zone whether carried or fumbled that in effect cancelled the exception, then the force which put the ball in the end zone was the fumble, (yes in a way it was both the 'force' which moves the ball out of the end zone until it did the football bounce and became THE force which moved the ball into the end zone). It not being possible to add a new force to a fumble in flight, the fumble would be the only option for a question of force resulting in a safety, but then if the grounded fumble was muffed that could be a new force which would result in a touchback, and when in doubt touchback.
Here are the arguments in my head:
1. If he ran to the one and fumbled it back its a safety/touchback, so when the fumble left the end zone the momentum exception was cancelled, and the force is either the fumble or the muff of a grounded fumble.
2. The last time the ball crossed the goal line has to be your focus, and the last time the ball crossed the goal line it was a result of the fumble: safety or the force was the muff of the grounded fumble: touchback.
P.S. Since a loose ball remains in team possession of the team last in player possession. Team B did have possession at the 1 outside the endzone, even though no player ever possessed the ball outside the endzone.
|
I principally disagree with the bolded and italicized section.
From the exception definition: ...and his momentum carries him into the end zone
where the ball is declared dead in his team's possession or it goes out of bounds in the end zone...
So this does meet the principles of the momentum exception. The ball is dead in his possession after bouncing out of bounds. I don't see any provision or rule that disallows the momentum exception simply because the ball was fumbled out of the endzone and bounced back in.
I can kind of follow your path on the remainder of your post, but I still think the binding rule in this situation would be 2-13-1 and that force can only be from the field of play to the end zone. So in essence, the muffing of the ball in both scenarios in the endzone is inconsequential. The force that put the ball in the endzone was still the pass by A under the momentum exception. So I've got a touchback and 1st and 10 for B from the 20.