once they rule a play as a "force out", the play is not reviewable.
Further, officials sometimes decide NOT to call the force-out when they believe the receiver has come down INBOUNDS with the ball (viewing it as superfluous), only to have the play CHALLENGED AND REVERSED because the affected receiver was out by a couple of inches, with no ability to retroactively say, "but he was forced out, so the play stands."
INTERESTING, EH? EH?
2007-12-07 07:13:48 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Yeah, the who thing really sucks...
Refs can't predict the future. They can't say "Oh well, he would have beyond a doubt landed in bounds had he not been hit." The whole thing makes you scratch your head. I do like the forceout rule (this is one of the rare occassions that I like a rule that favors the offense! haha) because it both protects WR's, and makes a receiver and/or corner need great dexterity. defending posts and/or deep balls would be so simple if the forceout rule was not in effect.
That being said, the challenge system for it sucks. You need to be able to challenge both ways. I suspect we will see a rule change with this one. I have no idea why they would have made it like that to begin with... I guess it was to protect a ref who ruled a forceout due to the sujectivity of the call.
If you remember, there have been quite a few rule changes with the instant replay since its inception (as far as what can/can't be challenged, etc.), and I think this will continue for another few years before they finally get everything worded right.
2007-12-07 07:44:31 · answer #1 · answered by Jim Baw 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Without that rule, no receiver would ever stand a chance at catching a ball on the sideline. I DO, however believe that it needs to be reviewable.
The rule is fine the way it is. A defender can't PUSH a receiver out of bounds to prevent him from a good catch. The fact that it's not reviewable is kinda odd though. The rule isn't going anywhere, but as I've read, there's going to be a lot of change in what is and is not reviewable. It doesn't matter what is/isn't reviewable, the coach only gets two challenges anyway.
2007-12-07 10:25:39 · answer #2 · answered by joecon113 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yeah, a bit of a dichotomy there, eh?
Really, I'm torn on this one. I see the problem you're pointing out and it's a good point, but at the same time I do like the receiver getting credit on some obvious force outs. The problem seems to have as much to do with what can/can't be reviewed as with the rule itself. I guess my thinking is that they should allow the officials to review force outs. It's tough when you're officiating a game to make those snap judgments when you're looking at possession, feet in bounds, etc.
2007-12-07 07:21:47 · answer #3 · answered by Craig S 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If I didn't know better I would say you saw that Browns vs Cardinals game. That was a force out if I ever did see one but that wasn't even reviewable because the official ruled it out of bounds.
Yes it is bogus... same as the no contact rule after five yards or ten yards... I can't remember... Let's throw in the rule you can't take your helmet off on the field of play.... There are so many bogus rules. Pretty soon they'll have a rule against tackling if they could. Give me a break.
2007-12-07 07:22:04 · answer #4 · answered by Ducky Jackal 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's an interesting point, but you have to trust your officials with some judgement calls. You can't work as a league without it. I don't want to get to the point where we're reviewing every other play. Officials should just call a force out when its close to be covered.
2007-12-07 07:18:55 · answer #5 · answered by Buy Sam a Drink 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
good point, they need to change that in the offseason. That rule makes no sense whatsoever. and the people that dont want change are morons. "we gotta trust the refs judgement" bullshit they are a bunch or part time dumbshits. they need all refs to be full time and if we have the technology to make sure its the right call why not use it. Its gonna suck when a team loses a super bowl because of the force out rule.
Unless its the patriots!
2007-12-07 07:44:23 · answer #6 · answered by George C 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Interesting loop hole, but I see no fix because you shouldn't be able to review a 'force out' called on the field because there is some subjectivity to the call itself. Reviews by definition need to have 'proof beyond a resonable' doubt in order to reverse the call. That's impossible with a subjective call. That's why pass interference, etc. is not reviewable as well.
Nothing is perfect.
2007-12-07 07:44:46 · answer #7 · answered by Minnesota Fats 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You have to have the forceout rule. Otherwise, when a WR jumps for a catch, the DB could just carry him out of bounce and mak it no catch.
The rule should stay, but it should be reviewable.
2007-12-07 07:44:07 · answer #8 · answered by tocman45 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree - it's an utterly ridiculous rule. According to Jeff Fisher, the Titans' coach and member of the rules committee (or whatever the correct name is), there's a good chance that stupid rule will be gone next year. I say good riddance!!
2007-12-07 07:21:28 · answer #9 · answered by Sherry E 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Have to draw the line on reviews somewhere, may not always workout the way we would hope.
2007-12-07 07:19:14 · answer #10 · answered by Tracy S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋