NFL Fumble
 

During the Seattle/Atlanta game, the play where Lynch scored at the end of the 4th quarter was ruled a score with no fumble. But the ball came loose (after the score), and Unger grabbed the ball.

One of the booth guys mentioned something about a fumble inside the two minute warning must be recovered by the player last in possession (something like the 4th down fumble rule). Now, this was not 4th down, but it was inside the two minute warning.

Is this the case for the NFL?

Yes, inside of two minutes of either half, on 4th down, and any try, only the player that fumbled the ball my recover and advance the ball on Team A. If recovered by a teammate, the ball is dead and it's A ball at the spot of the recovery or where the fumbled occurred...whichever is worse.

I'm trying to figure out what you're asking. If the issue was whether the ball was loose before it was ruled dead (by virtue of TD), any action that occurred after the dead ball indication should be ignored, so who cares about the spot if the fumble were recovered? Then it's just a question of TD vs. inadvertent whistle.

APG answered it. It was related to recovery of a fumble by team A inside the 2 minute warning. I fumbled the language when trying to describe the situation.

For the record, that's true on this play because an offensive player recovered the ball. If there is a fumble in the last two minutes, or 4th down, or on a try, it's still a live ball. It just has to go back to the spot of the fumble if an offensive player other than the fumbler recovers it. Also, for purposes of awarding the ball after a fumble on replay, the whistle or touch down signal is ignored.

So, for example, if the running back had been deemed on replay to have lost the ball before the ball crossed the plane, and it had been recovered by the defense, it would be a turnover, not a dead ball, even if a whistle had blown or TD or other dead ball signal given.

Edit: For completeness, I guess I should also add going out of bounds in the end zone before recovery, which would have been touch back notwithstanding a whistle or TD signal.

Even if he didn't cross the goal line... is this really a fumble given that it did not hit the ground?

Yes as it was a loss of player possession from an act that wasn't a kick or pass.

Seriously, the NFL would ignore the whistle in such a case? So as in basketball, the NFL doesn't expect the players to stop playing on the whistle?

This is just like any other down vs. fumble play. If replay shows a player fumbling before the play is over, and replay also shows a clear recovery, the ball is dead and it's the recovering team's ball at that spot. The same would be true if a runner was ruled OOB and fumbled and there's a recovery in the immediate action following the fumble.

Out of curiosity, why is this the rule? Even for NCAA with the 4th down fumble rule. Was there an issue of intentional loose balls?

I found this link which seems to hint at history of the rule (most of the links in the article are broken).

But was it the Holy Roller that led to this?

Famous announcing: 'Holy Roller' - NFL Videos

This is the so-called (for better or worse) "Hochuli rule" following the Chargers v. Broncos inadvertent whistle a few years back. Essentially, the NFL modified the replay rules to include limited exceptions to the inadvertent whistle rule in circumstances of a fumble. It's section 9(c) of the replay rules.

Upon further review, however, my initial analysis might have been off. The rule is more limited than I understood when I posted. By its terms, it only applies to cases in which a runner is ruled down by contact or a pass is deemed incomplete. In either case, if the whistle is sounded, but the it turns out the runner was not down by contact or there was a catch, the defense can recover a subsequent fumble notwithstanding an official having sounded his whistle. Does this apply to goal line plays? Clearly, I think, if the whistle is not sounded, the ball remains live despite a call of TD. But if the whistle sounds, a technical reading of the rule would indicate that even if the play is deemed to have been a fumble not a TD on replay, the whistle would preclude the defenders from obtaining possession. My sense, however, is that the rule is not generally enforced by its plain terms and read more broadly. Moreover, I do not know whether it is a proper mechanic in the NFL to sound the whistle upon a TD call.

What I am sure of is that I sincerely hope that none of you ever has a rule named after you. :)

That's right. The rule addresses the situation where on 4th down the defense has stopped a runner short of the LTG and before going down the runner "fumbles" the ball past the LTG. If recovered by an opponent, no big deal, since the offense was going to turn it over on downs anyway. If recovered by a teammate, the offense gets a "cheap" new series.

The "Holy Roller" play was pretty clearly an IFP and illegal bat if you ask me. ;)

Seems to me the way to combat this was to call an incomplete pass, and if necessary, an IFP. If a ball is intentionally "fumbled" forward, seems like a pass to me.

But why within the 2 minute warning?

And I wonder why NFHS has yet to adopt such a rule.

I thought the same when I watched it.

Let's be clear about this: Are you referring to an apparent recovery after a whistle?

Yes