- 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: NFL completion rule needs to be changed
Posted on 11/16/15 at 12:45 pm to Byron Bojangles III
Posted on 11/16/15 at 12:45 pm to Byron Bojangles III
quote:
Once OBJ had control of the ball and 2 feet down play should be over and should be a TD
I don't get the knighting for OBJ on this play, there are plenty of awful examples (Dez, Johnson, various others) that the OBJ play shouldn't be a rallying cry for change.
This post was edited on 11/16/15 at 12:56 pm
3
Posted on 11/16/15 at 12:48 pm to Jcorye1
quote:
I don't get the knighting for OBJ on this play, there are plenty of awful examples (Dez, Johnson, various others) that the ODJ play shouldn't be a rallying cry for change
I agree completely. There are way more controversial plays, like the ones you just mentioned.
Posted on 11/16/15 at 12:50 pm to dnm3305
quote:
.". There was a play last night where a Cardinals player caught the ball on an underneath crossing route, turned up field and took two steps, was hit from behind and fumbled and ball was scooped up by Seahawks defender. Did he not just do what Pereira's explanation required?
Was it ruled a fumbled?
Posted on 11/16/15 at 12:50 pm to KosmoCramer
It was ruled an incomplete catch
Posted on 11/16/15 at 12:53 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
Was it ruled a fumbled?
No, it was ruled an incomplete catch, although clearly by the rule that Pereira just explained it should have been a catch and fumble.
Posted on 11/16/15 at 12:53 pm to SabiDojo
quote:
It was ruled an incomplete catch
Yes it was and I still have no clue how it was
Posted on 11/16/15 at 12:59 pm to Oddibe
quote:
The only thing I will say is the officials ruled correctly PER THE RULES of the game.
What rule did they apply correctly.
He secured the ball with both feet in. He didn't fall so I don't think the "finish the catch" nonsense is applicable.
Not doubting you, just not sure which rule applied.
Posted on 11/16/15 at 1:00 pm to LSUJuice
quote:I was going to make the same point. After that fiasco, much of the NFL is out of the players hands. No pun intended.
A better example is the Dez non-catch last year, because in my opinion he DID make a football move, which was to dive for the pylon.
Posted on 11/16/15 at 1:10 pm to Jcorye1
quote:. I didn't pick the play because it was OBJ. I picked the play because I was watching the game and that call ended up being the difference.
I don't get the knighting for OBJ on this play, there are plenty of awful examples
I personally think the nfl has taken the definition of a catch to the extreme.
Posted on 11/16/15 at 1:14 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:said he didn't complete a football move. Which is take a third step.
just not sure which rule applied.
My point is that it happened in the endZone. No need to make a football move after the catch is established.
Posted on 11/16/15 at 1:40 pm to Oddibe
quote:
BUT there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that both of the players made the catch and controlled the ball.
And I have no doubt in my mind that you're incorrect.
It blows my mind people have't figured out what is and isn't a catch.
Posted on 11/16/15 at 1:57 pm to Oddibe
I thought Ed Hochuli said that OBJ lost possesion simultaneously as the second foot came down?
I was halfway watching the game but saw this play, I could have mis heard the review though.
I didn't think the "football move" was in play in this situation?
I was halfway watching the game but saw this play, I could have mis heard the review though.
I didn't think the "football move" was in play in this situation?
Posted on 11/16/15 at 2:00 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
quote:
It blows my mind people have't figured out what is and isn't a catch.
Watch the Freeman video above and explain that one. He catches it, turns upfield and takes 2 steps then lunges across the line into the endzone. After he hits the ground the ball comes out. So did he not "become a runner" or "make a football move" at all during all of that?
Posted on 11/16/15 at 2:06 pm to Oddibe
quote:
The endzone is already treated completely different. A runner only has to control the ball till it breaks the plane. A receiver has to get 2 feet down and make a football move. Makes absolutely no sense to me.
Sort of on the same argument, I've seen plays where the receiver catches it, drags the second foot while going out of bounds, then drops it out of bounds and it is ruled incomplete. I guess this is sort of the same thing. You have to maintain possession until the play is over, whether you land in bounds or are going out. It isn't just the ball touching your hands and two feet in for a catch. And we've also seen plays where a WR is bobbling the ball and ends up with possession, but not with both feet down. I think the rule is pretty clear. Possession of the ball, both feet in bounds. I side with the defense on this, if the catch is in any way not made, it shouldn't be a touchdown.
Posted on 11/16/15 at 2:15 pm to SabiDojo
quote:
But to be a runner you have to have control of the ball first before you cross the plane, right? Otherwise, you are in the process of a catch, and you must complete the catch.
I'm 100% sure that if the OBJ play happened on the half-yard line it would have been ruled a TD. If he is pulling it down with both feet in bounds, but the ball is knocked out as he moves the ball towards his body across the pylon, I'm confident they would have ruled a TD. Even if they play happened at the goal line and he had possession across the goal line they would have ruled it a TD.
IMO the reason they went by the book with the catch definition in this case was because it was near the sideline.
Posted on 11/16/15 at 2:15 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
quote:
It blows my mind people have't figured out what is and isn't a catch.
I know, it seems like it's so simple that you'd think the NFL's own officials could actually get this consistently right?
Posted on 11/16/15 at 2:22 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
quote:
It blows my mind people have't figured out what is and isn't a catch.
I don't see much of a difference between OBJ's play and the Lance Moore 2-point conversion in the Super Bowl.
I'm genuinely curious as to the difference between the two.
Posted on 11/16/15 at 2:23 pm to Byron Bojangles III
quote:
Once a runner crosses the plain it's a TD there. If the balls knocked out its not a fumble.
Once OBJ had control of the ball and 2 feet down play should be over and should be a TD
It should be this simple.
Posted on 11/16/15 at 2:25 pm to taylork37
quote:
Once OBJ had control of the ball and 2 feet down play should be over and should be a TD
quote:
It should be this simple.
So a guy who goes up for a catch, catches it, puts two feet on the ground, falls to the ground, and the ball comes out, you think it should still be a TD?
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News