Seconded. Especially when it's not especially clever. I'm glad the refs didn't call the penalty last night and let common sense rule. Chancellor made a great play that saved the game; Wright batting the ball was essentially immaterial because the ball was headed out anyway and no one could have stopped it. Sucks to be the Lions, but they also had their chance to win and didn't. The Seahawks need to get their act together on offense. It's looking dire our there and they can't rely on miracles forever. Also, Luke Willson kind of looks like he plays harder than Jimmy Graham. He was more noticeable at the end, anyway. That's what I've been saying all morning. It would've been far worse for the Seahawks to lose on that stupid technicality. It was inconsequential to the play and would've been a dreadful way to lose. After much thinking about it the rule is in place because if there's a fumble in the endzone they want both sides to have to complete an equal action, which is a fumble recovery. If an offensive player and a defensive player are both going for the same ball then it's much easier just to punch it than it is to jump on it and gain possession. That makes more sense. That creates another question - is it also illegal batting if there's a fumble within the regular 100 yards of play and an offensive player bats a fumble out of bounds and away from a defender to maintain possession? Wright said that he intentionally hit the ball out of the end zone because he didn't want to risk trying to recover it. I'd hardly call that inconsequential or a technicality considering the reason he hit the ball rather than letting it go or trying to pick it up is why that rule exists.