Why is a football fumbled into the end zone and out of bounds a touchback?

Question

Anyone who saw the Oregon-Cal game knows what I'm talking about. The last second play with Cameron Colvin.

why isn't i placed at the one instead? the ball is placed at the spot where it went out of bounds on every other play.

Answer 1

The rule was put in place in order to keep teams from purposely fumbling into the endzone in order to try and score. The rule has been criticized from time to time, and there has talks of giving the ball to the offense at the spot of the fumble, but I wouldn't count on seeing a rule change any time soon.

Answer 2

It should be a penalty but I don't think they should give the ball to the other team. It should be a 10 or so yard penalty from the spot of the fumble and a loss of down, if I made up the rules. A turnover is too extreme of a penalty for something that the opposing defense did not really earn by actually recovering the fumble and it too randomly punishes a fumble that barely crosses the goal line instead of going out at the 1. If they are trying to be extreme, why not just make it like the 8 ball in pool, fumble into the endzone and out of bounds and you lose the game instantly. But that would be horrible of course. I can understand the idea that 'teams would fumble into the endzone' but I think there may already be a rule against that, and if not, it could be made so that all fumbles into the endzone not recovered by the defense result in a penalty and no TD, even if recovered by the offense in the endzone.

I am continually amazed as a Saints fan that no Saint has managed to do this yet. Reggie Bush, Mike Karney, and others love to do aerial acrobatics to stretch the ball into the cone for a TD at their furthest reach. They often drop the ball right afterwards. But if a ref ever thought they lost control just before the ball hit the cone, their little trick would result in a turnover. So, except maybe on third or fourth down in critical situations, I think offensive players should be really careful about doing anything too acrobatic to graze the corner of the endzone. A mistake there would just look sooo stupid.

Also, I would note that Woody J's logic would imply that an incomplete pass into the endzone should also result in the ball being given to the defense on the 20. Anyone for that?

If a pass hits the ground in the endzone, that means no team caught it. Why shouldn't that give the defense the ball at the 20 yard line? Think about it. :-) The rule makes sense. ;-) It's not a touchdown for the offense because the receiver didn't catch the ball after the ball crossed the goal line. In college, you can't have forward movement on an incompletion. So, the obvious ruling is to award the ball to the other team (in that situation).

Answer 3

Since the offensive did not have possession of the ball when it crossed into the end zone, a touchdown cannot be rewarded. It would be inappropriate to give the ball to the offense at the one yard line because there is no guarentee that this is where it would have been recovered. This is equivalent to intercepting a ball in the end zone and downing the ball for a touchback. The defensive forced a fumble and it rolled out of the back of the end zone before the offense could recover the ball. It should be the defense's ball.

Answer 4

If a player runs into the end zone as soon as he breaks the plane of the goal line it is a touch down and any subsequent action including fumbling is irrelevant. If someone fumbles the ball in the end zone on a punt or kick off return then it dpends on which team recovers the ball.If the receiving team recovers then it is a touchback and they get the ball on the 20.If the kicking team recovers then it is a touchdown.On a pass play into the end zone same rule applies as running it in.You cannot fumble in the end zone on a pass play because once the plane of the goal line is broken it is a touchdown.

Answer 5

If it goes out of bounds in the end zone, that means no team recovered it. That gives the defense the ball at the 20 yard line. Think about it. The rule makes sense. It's not a touchdown for the offense because the ball carrier didn't have possession of the ball when the ball crossed the goal line. In college, you can't have forward movement on a fumble. so the obvious ruling is to award the ball to the other team (in that situation).

Answer 6

What's wrong with just giving the offense the ball at the spot of the fumble? This could be the case with all forward-moving fumbles. You can't reward the team for fumbling the ball, but they also shouldn't be penalized with loss of possession for a fumble out of bounds.

Answer 7

Because that's what the inventor decided it was. It only makes since. Why wouldn't you give the team that didn't screw up the ball in that situation? The fumbling team was either careless and dropped the ball or the defense forced the fumble. any way you look at it the defense deserves to get the ball.

Answer 8

because its just like a punt. if the ball went out of bounds in the other endzone, it would be a saftey. if they fumble it in the endzone, its pretty much a free ball for anybody and if it goes out of bounds in the end zone, they cant place it anyplace in the endzone and they are supposed to place the ball where it goes out but they cant so they consider it a touchback and give possission to the other team. its kinda confusing at first but i understand it now

Answer 9

Well what else could it be? The offense couldn't get the ball from inside the end zone. And the D should be rewarded for forcing the fumble.

Answer 10

It's just the rules, same thing on a punt or kickoff, if the ball goes into the endzone and out of bounds it is placed on the 20.