Q: Why did you determine that the on-field ruling of a fumble was in fact a fumble (1st-and-10 at the Philadelphia 30, 5:26 remaining in the third quarter)?
A: āOn that play, the running back was touched by a defensive player, number 51, and then he did have contact with number 69 on the offense. It was deemed a stumble on the field, so because it was a stumble, when he went down, he would not be down by contact and therefore it was a fumble.ā
Q: So, what would have qualified as down by contact when number 51 touched him there?
A: āIf no other player hit him and they ruled it not a stumble, and he went down after contact by number 51 of the defense with no other contact and he went immediately down, then he would be down by contact."
How does this make sense? Ball carriers knock into their own side's players a lot of the the time when they're getting tackled!
And as bleedinggreennation.com notes, there's no mention of the word 'stumble' in the rulebook so how can something be 'ruled' a stumble or not? And they admitted there was contact at the beginning of that 'stumble'.
