Was Polamalu's ball poke legal?

I'm not saying it's a dumb rule. I'm saying it should be interpreted based on the situation. In this situation, Steelers did not control the ball and the opposing team fumbled. In my view, Troy tried to keep the ball alive, not knock it into the endzone. However, this is based on my perception, watching on a television. But even the referees have a perspective, based on their field position, at the time. I believe the referees would be able to determine if there was a purposeful fumble.

Maybe they didn't blow the whistle because the team that poked the ball was not the team that fumbled the ball...

 

The offense provided the impetus by not protecting the football and fumbling. The defense never posessed the ball. Isn't that why if there is a fumble forward, and the offense recovers, the offense is granted the yardage and not an automatic first down (in the event the fumble does not pass the 1st down marker)?

It seems to me that, when determining "forward" and "backward" movement, the consideration is the last team to actually control the ball. In this instance that was the Patriots.

 

This is what I believe is the key to the way the referees called the game, during this play.

 

The relevant rule, I believe, states that a player may not "bat" a loose ball toward the other teams endzone. It doesn't seem to matter who fumbled it or which team was on offense. The relevant rule states a player . . .

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/useofhands (near the bottom)

I don't know how this rule has been interpreted by the league but it seems clear.

 

That is the most clear explanation I've seen yet about the rule (and BTW, has nothing to do with the holy roller rule for all of you who keep talking about that). But, what an obscure rule. It even goes on to say that a player can't bat or punch a ball that another player possesses. If that were enforced, then nobody should be able to knock a ball out of a ball-carrier's grasp. Glad that one doesn't get enforced!

 

This was really good information and I saw it posted on both the Post site, ESPN, and the Trib. So, since it was illegal and the Pats would have had the ball on the 20, would they be given additional yards for the penalty by Troy? Or, would it just be on the 20 and that's it?

 

All the more reason to keep the Zebras out of the game!
This thread reads like a series of lawyers` briefs to the judges... :evil:
My take on it is... Yeah, Troy got away with one... :o
Wow... boo hoo for the Patsies...
I also remember Troy getting robbed of an int. against the Colts, that led to Ben`s tackle on our road to SB40...
Or the ref not hearing Bettis call "Tails"(you said "heads..."),...Might be backwards on the actual call, but the ref had it clearly backwards, on Thanksgiving against the Lions, in overtime....
Which led to fans, and players on the sidelines, making "heads" or "tails" signs, and holding them up during the next weeks` coin tosses...
Point being...
Refs screw up all the time...
USUALLY not in our favor!!!
I will take the rare ones we get to our benefit...
What I absolutely do NOT want, is any more rule changes attributed to the way we play the game...
But, how much longer are they gonna let Troy jump up, and wrap his arms around the runningback/receiver`s head, and wrestle them down to the ground, like a baby steer, before they outlaw THAT?!?!
No horsecollars anymore... and now...
No more of whatever that thing is that Troy does!!!