- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Catch or no catch? Quiz on NFL rules for a completion
Posted on 2/1/16 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 2/1/16 at 2:18 pm
Thought this was a good little quiz on some interesting calls this year.
NYT Catch or no catch quiz.
Apparently, I suck at the rules of football.
NYT Catch or no catch quiz.
Apparently, I suck at the rules of football.
20
Posted on 2/1/16 at 2:26 pm to Spirit of Dunson
Fun quiz but not hard at all. Got them all.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 2:27 pm to Spirit of Dunson
Got 6 of 7, but that's because I remember most of those
Posted on 2/1/16 at 2:27 pm to Spirit of Dunson
5 out of 7. frick banking, I'm gonna be an NFL ref.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 2:27 pm to Spirit of Dunson
I only thought the last two were catches.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 2:28 pm to Spirit of Dunson
dez didnt catch it
Posted on 2/1/16 at 2:28 pm to Spirit of Dunson
PI or no PI would be much harder
Posted on 2/1/16 at 2:28 pm to castorinho
I only did as good as I did since I remember the plays... but I also remember not agreeing with most of the calls. So, maybe if I were taking it cold, I wouldn't have done as well.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 2:31 pm to Spirit of Dunson
4/7
Posted on 2/1/16 at 2:38 pm to Spirit of Dunson
Got 5 of 7, but that's because I remember seeing most of those live
Posted on 2/1/16 at 3:00 pm to Spirit of Dunson
Answered honestly, got 4 right.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 3:10 pm to Spirit of Dunson
I suck because I would have said 5 of those 7 were catches.
Back in the day (ie, a few years ago) didn't all you need for a copmletion was:
-2 feet down
-making a "football move" (if still in motion, not going OOB or in the end zone)
times were simpler then. Hell just in the first clip alone, Eifert has clear possession of the ball and the ball crosses the plane. I always thought that boom, play over right there. Guess not.
Back in the day (ie, a few years ago) didn't all you need for a copmletion was:
-2 feet down
-making a "football move" (if still in motion, not going OOB or in the end zone)
times were simpler then. Hell just in the first clip alone, Eifert has clear possession of the ball and the ball crosses the plane. I always thought that boom, play over right there. Guess not.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 3:13 pm to Spirit of Dunson
This was a tough test to take in regards to the fact that I already knew the outcome to all of them from watching the season.
The rules really aren't that hard to understand. This isn't a brag, but 9/10 during a live game I'll usually make the right call to my buddies (or myself if I'm wathcing alone).
I will say the only one I truly disagree with is the Odell one. Only because he was never brought to the ground, which is the big factor in all of these possession, was he a runner tricky calls. He had control, and then 2 feet and never fell to the ground. Since he never fell, IMO the play is over immediately after he has secured the ball with 2 feet in. Now had his knee hit at the end, or he fell then I would have agreed that was incomplete. The whole initial bugaboo with this rule was Calvin Johnson a few years ago. That, and Dez, was an issue of finishing the catch and maintaining possession all the way to ground. If you don't fall you cant use that ruling. Just my .02
ETA: every time I mention falling to the ground, I mean by "contact" and because of a defender, not just falling a la the Fitzgerald question(which is why i think that one was ruled complete).
The rules really aren't that hard to understand. This isn't a brag, but 9/10 during a live game I'll usually make the right call to my buddies (or myself if I'm wathcing alone).
I will say the only one I truly disagree with is the Odell one. Only because he was never brought to the ground, which is the big factor in all of these possession, was he a runner tricky calls. He had control, and then 2 feet and never fell to the ground. Since he never fell, IMO the play is over immediately after he has secured the ball with 2 feet in. Now had his knee hit at the end, or he fell then I would have agreed that was incomplete. The whole initial bugaboo with this rule was Calvin Johnson a few years ago. That, and Dez, was an issue of finishing the catch and maintaining possession all the way to ground. If you don't fall you cant use that ruling. Just my .02
ETA: every time I mention falling to the ground, I mean by "contact" and because of a defender, not just falling a la the Fitzgerald question(which is why i think that one was ruled complete).
This post was edited on 2/1/16 at 3:17 pm
Posted on 2/1/16 at 3:17 pm to Spirit of Dunson
4 and 6 are bullshite.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 3:19 pm to Spirit of Dunson
3 out of 7. 
Posted on 2/1/16 at 3:30 pm to Spirit of Dunson
The first one, Eifert...was always a TD...
Breaking the plane with initial control.
The fact that he needed to land on the ground with control makes no sense when breaking the plane is the objective...guys always used to dive for TD line even while bobbling the ball and that used to be fine.
The endzone was supposed to have only one rule, break the plane...doesn't matter if you fumbled immediately or only had it over for one second...there was a catch years ago where a receiver caught the ball in the endzone and was immediately stripped and it was a touchdown.
I still don't understand why falling vs. standing has such disparate requirements.
But now we have different rules for catches in the endzone and in the field of play and on the sidelines.
Breaking the plane with initial control.
The fact that he needed to land on the ground with control makes no sense when breaking the plane is the objective...guys always used to dive for TD line even while bobbling the ball and that used to be fine.
The endzone was supposed to have only one rule, break the plane...doesn't matter if you fumbled immediately or only had it over for one second...there was a catch years ago where a receiver caught the ball in the endzone and was immediately stripped and it was a touchdown.
I still don't understand why falling vs. standing has such disparate requirements.
But now we have different rules for catches in the endzone and in the field of play and on the sidelines.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 3:51 pm to Spirit of Dunson
I feel like this is more of a "what did the officials rule this as?" rather than a "was this actually a catch?" quiz.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 5:28 pm to Spirit of Dunson
the Fells one is bullshite
Posted on 2/1/16 at 5:34 pm to Spirit of Dunson
5 of 7. First one I switched my mind and got it wrong!
Posted on 2/1/16 at 5:47 pm to Spirit of Dunson
The catch pinned against the back of the Steelers leg was never a catch, but that doesn't matter now.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News