re: Stop with the whole he had two steps in but on the touchdown

quote:

---

He had two feet down before crossing the goal line. One foot was down when he caught it, he took a step, then was pushed as he crossed the goal line. It was a catch and a TD.

---

You clearly have not watched the replay I linked above. He has one foot on the ground when he catches it then his second step comes down on the out of bounds line. At no point does he get two steps in bounds with the ball in his hands. This was the whole premise of the topic and it’s not even close if you watch the video. It’s not even an argument he had two feet because it did not happen.

Did he hit the pylon with possession after already getting a foot down in bounds before the goal line?

Try harder

You only need 1 foot inbounds in college.

quote:

---

You only need 1 foot inbounds in college

---

But you need so much more to establish possession. What if a receiver gets hit in the hands at the 5 yard line, and then proceeds to bobble the ball all the way to the back of the end-zone, and when he finally appears to secure it (with one foot inbounds) goes out the back of the end-zone, hits the ground, and it moves on him?

The fact that he hit the pylon should have been enough. "

Exactly! This is what strikes me the most.

quote:

---

But he doesn’t take two steps in bounds lol. That’s my whole point. I’m not sure where yall are even getting this. Watch the video

---

and if you'll read the post that you're responding to, he says it doesn't matter if both steps were in bounds. In college football you only need one foot inbounds with possession. Barion Brown brought a foot down inbounds and a second foot down out of bounds with possession of the football. This indicates he made two football moves after possessing the ball and he clearly had possession catching the ball with one foot down in bounds.

quote:

---

So many different issues are being conflated here. It was the right call for one reason: lack of ball possession. That has to happen before a touchdown, first down, anywhere you are trying to go.

---

It was the wrong call

By your shitty logic a neceiver who catches the ball on the 2 yard line in the middle of the field with possession and crosses the goal line then flips the ball like they do and it hits the ground it would be incomplete.

You are saying they would have to what? Hold the ball till they get back to the bench?

He caught the ball outside the endzone and had possession when he crossed the goal line. It's a fricking touchdown.

frick off, ignoramus!

He had 3 steps down to establish control of the catch. Right foot in bounds, left foot out of bounds and right knee out of bounds.

There was no bobbling of the ball until maybe AFTER the right knee had hit the ground and then the hand with the ball hit the ground. I'm not even sure there was a bobble after that hand with the ball hit the ground.

Control of the ball was established. He got his one foot down in bounds. He crossed the plane of the endzone with the ball in bounds and took out the pylon in bounds.

Result......clinical touchdown

frick Birmingham SEC trying to screw LSU and help Bama every chance they can.

Anybody got any molotov cocktails ready to go? I will meet you and that criminally corrupt org in the Kramer building will finally come down!!!!!

Catch, Interception, Recovery
ARTICLE 3. a. To catch a ball means that a player:
1. Secures firm control with the hand(s) or arms) of a live ball in flight before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground inbounds with any part of the body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable that player to erform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch o1 and the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., anc
4. Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
b. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent) the player must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also equired for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and goin: o the ground out of bounds. If the player loses control of the ball whicl then touches the ground before they regain control, it is not a catch. If the player regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is a catch.
C.
grone layer loses control of the ball while simulancusly touching the
with any part of their body, or if there is doubt that the acts were imultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a sligh movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considere
RULE 2 / DEFINITIONS
FR-33
loss of possession; the player must lose control of the ball in order for there to be a loss of possession.
d. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control and continues to maintain control, and the elements above are satisfied, it is a catch.
e. An interception is a catch of an opponent's pass or fumble.
• A catch by any kneeling or prone inbounds player is a completion

quote:

---

4. Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
b. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent) the player must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also equired for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and goin: o the ground out of bounds. If the player loses control of the ball whicl then touches the ground before they regain control, it is not a catch. If the player regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is a catch.
C.
grone layer loses control of the ball while simulancusly touching the
with any part of their body, or if there is doubt that the acts were imultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a sligh movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered

---

This is what it boils down to. The replay officials ruled that he did NOT take two steps, which I think they got right. They then ruled that the ball movement we all saw constituted loss of control. I can’t agree with that.