Stalin828
New member
- Joined:
- Oct 2, 2012
- Posts:
- 278
- Liked Posts:
- 121
That isn't what Weem's tweet says. His tweet says there is no way they could score.
That isn't what Weem's tweet says. His tweet says there is no way they could score.
dabearsjjk
Active member
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 1,099
- Liked Posts:
- 228
I'll make a new thread and explain it
Stalin828
New member
- Joined:
- Oct 2, 2012
- Posts:
- 278
- Liked Posts:
- 121
There are different rules for the football when it is possessed and when it is not possessed. If the player possesses the ball and crosses the plane of the endzone the ball is in the endzone. If the player does not possess the ball the ball isn't in the endzone until they establish possession. You can't establish possession in the air. It requires your feet to come down in bounds.
Since you want me to reference the rule book, here you go: "The spot of first touching is normally the yard line at which the ball is at when touched. If the first touching occurs while the ball is in the air above or beyond the goal line, and prior to the ball touching the goal line or the ground beyond the goal line, the spot of first touching is deemed to be the spot from which the touching player left the field of play, but in no event inside the receiving team’s one yard line."
Once Weems touches the ball, the play progresses as normal. The kicking team can attempt to recover or whatever. However, regardless of what happens the receiving team can choose to take the ball at the spot the defenders first touched the ball (or any subsequent touch that occurred before a member of the kicking team touches the ball).
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 56,179
- Liked Posts:
- 61,311
Can we please get this back on topic? We know the rule now, how can it be exploited?
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,062
- Liked Posts:
- 38,077
Yeah I think the dicussion in the other thread was because FT thought Hoculi's explanation suggested that Weems knocking it into the end zone did not impact the result so then we started speculating how it could not have impacted the result and the two options where that either Hoculi thought the Vikings had touched the line before jumping or the above ie if the receiver team interrupts the kicking team downing the ball in the field of play then it is a touchback.
Hence why I said I am not sure. I have seen it reported that we would have gotten the ball at the 1 if the Vikings didn't touch it in the end zone after Weems but then that still seems inconsistent with the explanation Hoculi gave. Will see if I can find the video of his explanation.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,062
- Liked Posts:
- 38,077
See my response to Stalin. The debate in the other thread was because FT thought Hoculi's explanation was not consistent with the above.
ClydeLee
New member
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2010
- Posts:
- 14,829
- Liked Posts:
- 4,113
- Location:
- The OP
By doing what Weems did.
The touching like this only happens slightly when they're trying to save it from being a touch back. Trying to get a returner to look back and pick up the ball after touched is unlikely to work. Many defenders, even if the team is still blocking are going to be close down field. The opportunity to scoop the ball and get a decent return is very slim in that case.
Fucking A on Tapatalk
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2011
- Posts:
- 7,830
- Liked Posts:
- 9,011
Are you thinking of ambergris? That's whale vomit. They made perfume from it, but some people also eat it.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,062
- Liked Posts:
- 38,077
Not sure if this has been posted but McCann got a TD on a similar play.
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-cant-miss-plays/09000d5d81c480bc/McCann-returns-punt-97-yards-for-TD
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-cant-miss-plays/09000d5d81c480bc/McCann-returns-punt-97-yards-for-TD
dabearsjjk
Active member
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 1,099
- Liked Posts:
- 228
Sorry I was wrong on the touchback
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 22,260
- Liked Posts:
- 17,824
- Location:
- Chicago, IL.
My favorite teams
I thought they found giant squid beaks inside of ambergris before which is why people believed it was whale poop or something from the intestinal tract.
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 56,179
- Liked Posts:
- 61,311
That is correct. Saw that shit on futurama.
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 1,693
- Liked Posts:
- 1,221
Once the Vikings touched the ball they can never regain possession of the ball again on that play, all they can do is down it. That's how its always been. Weems could have picked it up and ran and fumbled it to the Vikings but in the end the Bears would have gotten the ball back where the Vikings last touched it before Weems picked it up. Unless it goes into the endzone, then all the Vikings can do is down it for a touchback.
Vikings never had a chance to poses the ball after they touched it first.
Vikings never had a chance to poses the ball after they touched it first.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,062
- Liked Posts:
- 38,077
Ambergris is a secretion from the bile duct of a sperm whale with the theory being it is secreted so that the hard sharp objects like a giant squid beak can pass through the body more easily.
Ambergris is usually passed throught the intestines and leaves the body via fecal matter but sometimes it can be vomited out as well hence why people think it is whale poo or whale vomit. It can be passed out via either method.
Ambergris is usually passed throught the intestines and leaves the body via fecal matter but sometimes it can be vomited out as well hence why people think it is whale poo or whale vomit. It can be passed out via either method.
Staff online NOW
-
bamainatlantaYou wake him up, you keep him up
