The most bizarre moment of the New Orleans Saints season may have already happened. In the second quarter, Chase Young brought down Jared Goff for what appeared to be a strip sack recovered by Jonas Sanker and returned for a touchdown. The play going to review was strange enough, but then it was overturned as an incompletion.
That was the last thing anyone expected. Goff was hit at the 23 yard line, and the ball landed behind the 20. We can have arguments on whether or not his arm was going forward, which would have impacted Young's sack numbers. However, the worst case scenario felt like Goff would be ruled to have a backwards pass.
Apparently, the ball could go backwards if the quarterback's intent was for it to go forward. It's a rule most football fans had never heard of until this very moment, likely because it makes no sense. The ball went backwards without being batted, so logically that should outweigh
Chase Young was robbed of a game changing moment
Who knows what would have happened in the rest of the game, but in the moment that was a potentially game changing moment for the Saints. The offense was anemic in the first half, and a touchdown from the defense was the type of juice the team needed.
Everyone was flat in the first half. The defense was stout, but this was a team in desperate need of a big play. This was the play the team was looking for that could have been that battery in their back.
You also have to wonder what would have been the impact of the play on the end of the game. The Saints stormed back in the second half to take the matchup into overtime. You have to wonder if that changes the rest of the game.
It's unfair to do that because teams would play the game different with a different score, but it's hard to not hypothesize about the way the game would have transpired. It's especially difficult when hours after the game, the call still doesn't make sense.
The explanation feels made up, though it is in the official rulebook, and it's one that will be heavily discussed for the rest of the week. It begs the question if the rule has been improperly enforced for years. If that's the case, what made this the moment to course correct.
The idea that the hand moving forward is irrelevant flies in the face of what we've been told for years when reviewing if a quarterback fumbled the football. We've seen countless times where the quarterback starts his wind up but gets hit, and it's always been a fumble. Everything about Young's sack felt like a textbook strip sack.
Then to negate the idea that the ball went backwards as well makes the whole logic illogical. It's hard to accept that it's a rule, but it's even more difficult to accept that it makes any sense. In a game this close, it's hard to not think of what this call meant, and the impact of it being taken away.
Add us as a preferred source on Google