Aaron Rodgers “cussed out” an official against Cowboys yet was not penalized for “abusive language”

[Cotton]

The arm has to be moving forward and the QB has to have posession of the ball. Flicking it into the ground while you're fumbling isn't a pass.

This is correct.

 

[L.T. Fan]

The arm has to be moving forward and the QB has to have posession of the ball. Flicking it into the ground while you're fumbling isn't a pass.

If the ball is in the throwers hand and the motion of the hand moves it forward it is a pass whether it’s overhand, underhand flick or any other motion that makes the ball go from the throwers hand. As long as the motion of the ball leaving the hand is caused by the thrower it’s a forward pass. The rule is predicated on the source of the motion leaving the hand.

 

[L.T. Fan]

https://static.nfl.com/static/conten...ass_Fumble.pdf

i interpret the rule from this.

 

[lostxn]

If the ball is in the throwers hand and the motion of the hand moves it forward it is a pass whether it’s overhand, underhand flick or any other motion that makes the ball go from the throwers hand. As long as the motion of the ball leaving the hand is caused by the thrower it’s a forward pass. The rule is predicated on the source of the motion leaving the hand.

Yeah the issue I have with the call is the ball was coming out of his hand and was actually sideways when he flicked it forwards. I'll give him credit, it was totally ninja and worked to give the refs an excuse to take a TO away from us. But he didn't really have control of that ball. This should have been a situation where there wasn't enough there to reverse the initial call but that shit only comes in where it hurts us.

But whatever I'm biased tbth.

 

[data]

If the ball is in the throwers hand and the motion of the hand moves it forward it is a pass whether it’s overhand, underhand flick or any other motion that makes the ball go from the throwers hand. As long as the motion of the ball leaving the hand is caused by the thrower it’s a forward pass. The rule is predicated on the source of the motion leaving the hand.

I agree with this. Exact same as those Utah plays that John Elway used to run. I believe the winning OT play by Larry Fitzgerald in the playoffs vs the Packers was the same. Looking at the replay, I think Rodgers still had enough control of the football. I would've overturned the fumble, too.

I wonder how those tap passes direct from center are interpreted, though. Steelers have been running it a lot with Roethlisberger out this year...QB takes shotgun snap and essentially bounces it off his hands forward into a WR in motion crossing in front of him. Like hot potato game as a kid.

 

[Cotton]

But he didn't really have control of that ball

This is what makes it a fumble. Had he flicked it with control of the ball it's a pass. He absolutely did not have control when his fingertips brushed against the ball moving it forward.

 

[dbair1967]

Still wish the league could figure out how to cut the number of calls back, because it's making the games a beating to watch. College doesn't have nearly as many.

They don't want to figure it out, otherwise they would have a long time ago. Officiating has been in a death spiral for 10+ years now.

I still think its because there are corrupt officials either gambling themselves or being highly compensated by some very powerful people who do. Some of the calls and no calls are just too fucking obvious for someone to explain it away as "ignorance" or "he just missed that one"

 

[dbair1967]

This is what makes it a fumble. Had he flicked it with control of the ball it's a pass. He absolutely did not have control when his fingertips brushed against the ball moving it forward.

At best it was intentional grounding, they didnt even call that after seeing it on the replay.

 

[L.T. Fan]

At best it was intentional grounding, they didnt even call that after seeing it on the replay.

i agree with that.
For it to be intentional grounding it would have to be considered a forward pass.

 

[Cotton]

i agree with that.
For it to be intentional grounding it would have to be considered a forward pass.

Correct, so it is either intentional grounding or a fumble. They determined it was neither which isn't possible.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Correct, so it is either intentional grounding or a fumble. They determined it was neither which isn't possible.

Well it wasn’t ruled a fumble nor was it ruled intentional grounding. That only leaves an incomplete forward pass. That is what would be involved even if they ruled wrong and I think they did but I can see why they might have called it an incomplete forward pass under the rules. I think they got it wrong also but it’s history now.