- 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
re: How many steps does it take to make "the process" complete?
Posted on 1/11/15 at 9:59 pm to Roger Klarvin
Posted on 1/11/15 at 9:59 pm to Roger Klarvin
I don't know NFL rules like I know NCAA, but here's an A.R. concerning an airborne receiver....when something like this comes in a college game
That he's "extending the ball while reaching for the EZ" has no bearing on the ruling.
quote:
Airborne receiver A85 grasps a forward pass and in the process of going to the ground, first contacts the ground with his left foot as he falls to the ground inbounds. Immediately upon A85 hitting the ground, the ball comes loose and touches the ground. RULING: Incomplete pass. An airborne receiver must maintain control of the ball while going to the ground in the process of completing a catch.
That he's "extending the ball while reaching for the EZ" has no bearing on the ruling.
1
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:01 pm to arrakis
quote:
Immediately upon A85 hitting the ground, the ball comes loose and touches the ground.
Only it wasn't immediate. He had a knee and elbow down before it was loose
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:12 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
Only it wasn't immediate. He had a knee and elbow down before it was loose
It's all the way to the ground...the manuals, and every clinic I've attended over the years, all say the same. If his knee touched or an elbow or both....he still has to maintain FULL control of the ball to the ground.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:18 pm to arrakis
quote:
he still has to maintain FULL control of the ball to the ground.
So how many parts have to touch the ground? Until he is considered down or completely still. Does every appendage have to touch for it to be official?
You realize how arbitrary this rule is right?
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:18 pm to fightin tigers
quote:If your playing football, any move is a football move.
Do you have the list of football moves?
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:25 pm to bradwieser
That would stand to reason. Playing the game seems to be meaningless if the rules differ from game to game.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:26 pm to fightin tigers
Why can't you listen to the official telling you exactly why it wasn't a catch? Are you trained in officiating? Obviously not, so stop asking questions that have no bearing on this call. He didn't cintrol it through the ground. You have to do that for it to be a completed pass. You, Roger, et all seem hellbent on not grasping this concept. There is nothing arbitrary about it. You go up to catch a ball, you have to maintain possession through the ground. Dez didn't do that no matter how many questions you ask.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:29 pm to KeyserSoze999
I think it was an incompletion, but that doesn't take away from Bryant's heroic effort to catch the ball. The problem is the defender - he gets up there and disrupts the ball - you see Bryant have to regrip it while still in the air, then he falls, leans and tries to stretch it to the endzone - which would have worked - QBs/RBs do it all the time - BUT, he was still in the process of making a catch. He would have been better tucking the ball, rolling and letting the chips fall where they may - he might have scored - but, most likely he would have been down - 1st and goal inside the 1.
He never demonstrated complete control of the ball before the ground got involved - that was the problem. Once that interpretation starts - anyway, I vote "incompletion" but it was close.
He never demonstrated complete control of the ball before the ground got involved - that was the problem. Once that interpretation starts - anyway, I vote "incompletion" but it was close.
This post was edited on 1/11/15 at 10:41 pm
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:37 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
So how many parts have to touch the ground? Until he is considered down or completely still. Does every appendage have to touch for it to be official?
You realize how arbitrary this rule is right?
It probably seems arbitrary to Fantards, but to experienced officials it's not difficult at all to know when it meets the rule.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:38 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
Why can't you listen to the official telling you exactly why it wasn't a catch? Are you trained in officiating? Obviously not, so stop asking questions that have no bearing on this call. He didn't cintrol it through the ground. You have to do that for it to be a completed pass. You, Roger, et all seem hellbent on not grasping this concept. There is nothing arbitrary about it. You go up to catch a ball, you have to maintain possession through the ground. Dez didn't do that no matter how many questions you ask.
Well said.....
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:39 pm to KeyserSoze999
The flaw in this argument is the ball was dislodged for the first step, then gravity took over.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:43 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
Are you trained in officiating?
Oh snap, officials are never proven wrong. I forgot that golden rule.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:45 pm to fightin tigers
Prove him wrong or shut up already.
And props on not responding to any of the substance.
And props on not responding to any of the substance.
This post was edited on 1/11/15 at 10:46 pm
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:45 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
Why can't you listen to the official telling you exactly why it wasn't a catch?
Two reasons:
First, the reason he gave in the public statement talked about on ESPN differed from the NFL's transcript of the decision process. He gave two separate reasons for the ruling, which leads me to the second reason...
One of the reasons he gave was irrelevant (not possessing the ball through to the ground, given a football move was made) and the other simply incorrect (that he didn't personally believe Bryant intended to extend the ball).
The ref made the ruling because he decided he knew what Bryant's intent was, and then decided to skip that step in the decision process and just tell people he didn't control through to the ground. In reality, the initial decision that he wasn't intending to extend the ball was not worthy of an overturn because intent doesn't matter. Bryant DID extend the ball, whether or not he meant to.
Simply put, I am listening to the ref and calling his words both intellectually dishonest and incorrect per the NFL rule book. The fact that he is a ref and I am not doesn't make his false claim any less false.
This asinine appeal to the authority of part time workers who regularly blow it is insane. The fact the ref intentionally omitted his subjective decision from his public statement on the call indicates to me that he wants people to ignore that part. He wants people to believe this was just like the Calvin Johnson play, except that it wasn't and the rule was misapplied.
This post was edited on 1/11/15 at 10:51 pm
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:47 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
Prove him wrong or shut up already.
It is hard to prove arbitrary rules and interpretations of those rules.
I'm not saying this is some singular event in officiating. Sometimes they get it wrong. Human error is part of football.
This post was edited on 1/11/15 at 10:48 pm
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:49 pm to Roger Klarvin
The red reversed the call on his assumption Dez did not purposely extend the ball. That is a wrong call for reversal
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:50 pm to fightin tigers
I explained already why the rule isn't arbitrary, especially for a play where the ball clearly comes out of the receiver's hands. There's no debating this unless you're a Dallas homer or ignorant of the rules.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:52 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
delicious Roger tears
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:52 pm to lsupride87
To be honest I think this is what happened. During the game, the red along with 90% of this board assumed you had to control the ball through the ground no matter what. Hence his explanation during the game. After the game he realized that is 100% so he comes up with a long winded explanation about a common act of the game. There is no way in the booth he would have overturned it if he realized that
This post was edited on 1/11/15 at 10:55 pm
Posted on 1/11/15 at 10:52 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
explained already why the rule isn't arbitrary,
I'm speaking of the football move.
No one doubts the ground knocked the ball out. It is on film.
Page 2 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News