Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule
That doesn't make sense with the rule that was quoted:
This is the operable phrase, I think. Griffin had possession, lost it and was attempting to re-secure it. He dragged his feet inbounds with the ball in his grasp (screen grab is out there), then fell to the ground. If he loses control of the ball (which he did) AND the ball touches the ground(which no angle I've seen shows) then maybe the ruling was correct. But the ruling on the field was a TD, so you need incontrovertible evidence to overturn it. I don't think that existed.
Who knows what would have happened from that point, but I just think it's another case this year (not just with the Redskins) of the officiating being worse than ever.
|
Thats not the operable phrase, because it doesnt cover out of bounds. That rule does not allow for possession to be made out of bounds (no rule does).
Once the fumble happens, possession needs to be made again. In order for possession to happen, it takes one of two things.
1) Regain control of the ball and make a football move.
2) Regain control of the ball, then land on the ground and maintain possession of the ball through the ground.
Neither of which happened. The ruling is that he never had possession in the end zone. He had it prior to the goal line, then regained possession out of bounds past the goal line. Possession is not determined by ball control, it is determined by ball control AND the football move or maintaining control through the ground.
It doesnt matter if the ball hit the ground because the ruling is that when he re-made possession, he was already out of bounds.