Momentum question

[Smiley]

Originally Posted by sj

Are you saying A1 is going to just give the ball to B1?

Sure, by mistake obviously. Would this be any different than B taking the ball away?

[sj]

I was wondering for clarification. Maybe I'm seeing your point. Are you saying this? Since by definition you can only hand a ball to teammate there is no such thing as handing the ball to an opponent for rules' sake. Therefore this is also a fumble therefore momentum would apply in this play as well?

[Rick KY]

The momentum rule only applies to the catching of a ball in flight or recovery of a grounded ball, and this was niether. You could use the spirit of the rule to rule the same as if momentum had caused this. Sounds like a rewrite of the exception is in order.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Rick KY

The momentum rule only applies to the catching of a ball in flight or recovery of a grounded ball, and this was niether. You could use the spirit of the rule to rule the same as if momentum had caused this. Sounds like a rewrite of the exception is in order.

Does the rule say grounded?

[simpson]

NFHS 2006 Rule 8-5-2
It is a safety when:
a. A runner carries the ball ...blah-blah-blah
EXCEPTION: When a defensive player intercepts an opponent's forward pass; intercepts or recovers an opponnet's fumble or backward pass; or blah-blah-blah


The momentum exception did not originally include fumbles unless they were grounded. That was changed a couple years ago.

A couple of other key rules:
2-18
A fumble is any loss of player possession other than by handing, passing or legal kick.
2-19-1
Handing the ball is transferring player possession from one player to a teammate in blah-blah-blah

So ... the original play is a fumble and the momentum exception applies. 1&10 at the 2 yard line.

[Rick KY]

I agree the momentum exception should apply in this case, even though the language of the rules don't support it.

The momentum exception as stated applies only to loose balls caught or recovered.

Catch: The act of establishing player possession of a live ball which is in flight...

Recovery: ...is gaining possession of a live ball after it strikes the ground. ...

The B player in this play did niether, so the momentum rule does not apply in this narrow case. However, we can all pretty much agree he did gain possession of a fumble.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Rick KY

I agree the momentum exception should apply in this case, even though the language of the rules don't support it.

The momentum exception as stated applies only to loose balls caught or recovered.

Catch: The act of establishing player possession of a live ball which is in flight...

Recovery: ...is gaining possession of a live ball after it strikes the ground. ...

The B player in this play did niether, so the momentum rule does not apply in this narrow case. However, we can all pretty much agree he did gain possession of a fumble.

It doesn't say catch (so the definition of catch is irrelevant), it says intercept or recover. So, if it's the wording of the definition of recover that is causing you problems, what is to say that in the case of an airborne fumble or a case like the OP, that the B player did not "intercept" the fumble.

I truly think you are picking nits here to say, even technically, that this play would not qualify for the momentum exception.

[Smiley]

Originally Posted by sj

I was wondering for clarification. Maybe I'm seeing your point. Are you saying this? Since by definition you can only hand a ball to teammate there is no such thing as handing the ball to an opponent for rules' sake. Therefore this is also a fumble therefore momentum would apply in this play as well?

No, that's not what I am saying. I think we're stretching it to say that the momentum exception applies even though there is no "recovery". I wondered if we could stretch it even further by saying it applies even when there is no fumble, since a fumble is loss of possession other than handing, etc.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Smiley

Sure, by mistake obviously. Would this be any different than B taking the ball away?

Even such a ridiculous scenario is technically a fumble. You can't HAND the ball to an opponent. And since even this is still a fumble, the exception applies - not just logically and legally, but by the likely intent of the rule as well.