- 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: The corner end zone nullified TD
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:09 am to L S Usetheforce
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:09 am to L S Usetheforce
The replay guru in the booth made an important point.
IF he was ruled upright at the point of first making the catch, the following fall and fumble wouldn’t matter.
IF they felt contact was made and he wasn’t ruled upright, the Persuing fall and fumble matter.
I assume they decided he wasnt established as upright at the moment he caught and and contact was made, so then the fall and fumble mattered.
Not saying it was right but the explanation makes sense. I thought he had caught it with at least 1 foot established before contact, this giving them a chance to rule he was upright, negating the contact, fall and fumble.
IF he was ruled upright at the point of first making the catch, the following fall and fumble wouldn’t matter.
IF they felt contact was made and he wasn’t ruled upright, the Persuing fall and fumble matter.
I assume they decided he wasnt established as upright at the moment he caught and and contact was made, so then the fall and fumble mattered.
Not saying it was right but the explanation makes sense. I thought he had caught it with at least 1 foot established before contact, this giving them a chance to rule he was upright, negating the contact, fall and fumble.
This post was edited on 11/27/22 at 8:11 am
0
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:11 am to L S Usetheforce
It was an absurd ruling both on the field and on replay. As even McElroy pointed out he was upright, meaning he doesn’t have to “survive the ground” as long as he gains possession with at least one foot in.
I’m not excusing the team’s poor performance, but we should have been kicking off with about 2:30 and ALL THREE TIMEOUTS in a one-score game.
I’m not excusing the team’s poor performance, but we should have been kicking off with about 2:30 and ALL THREE TIMEOUTS in a one-score game.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:13 am to SulphursFinest
quote:
That wasn’t a catch. You can’t drop that.
The standard is firm grasp and making a football move, which in the definition includes warding off a defender. Looked like Jenkins did that.
Maybe it’s not a catch because he certainly should have held on but there is zero consistency in the way that rule is applied and I think it has ruined football at all levels. It’s the most controversial judgement that gets reviewed, it slows down games and confuses fans as it is ultimately a judgement call that hinges upon the call on the field.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:16 am to jeffsdad
quote:
No, not text book at all. He was an upright receiver that caught the ball. and took 2 more step. by rule it was a td and the refs blew the initial call.
He didn’t take two steps, he got a toe in bound with possession and was shoved, stumbling to the ground. In that process he dropped the ball therefore not completing the catch. Had it been ruled a TD initially it probably would have stood but the ref called it incomplete.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:22 am to L S Usetheforce
Evidently its the only time in football where you can have possession of the ball with a foot in the endzone and its not a touchdown?
Whats that? He didnt "complete" the catch?
Ok, when does he "complete" the catch? Out of bounds?
When is the moment it flips to a "catch"? When he's out of bounds?
So for it to be a "catch", it has to be "completed" out of bounds.
Seems reasonable.
Whats that? He didnt "complete" the catch?
Ok, when does he "complete" the catch? Out of bounds?
When is the moment it flips to a "catch"? When he's out of bounds?
So for it to be a "catch", it has to be "completed" out of bounds.
Seems reasonable.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:30 am to blueboxer1119
It was a TD. There was a game a few years ago where a team won by catching the TD, one foot down, ball is knocked out by a DB instantly, but since it was an upright receiver, the play was dead once his foot hit the ground in the EZ. Same principle as the ball crossing the goal line for a runner. Ball is dead instantly, so if a defensive player swipes at the ball and knocks it out it doesn't matter.
The refs killed THREE scores for LSU last night. The PI that was picked up and the "hold" that would have had us in the red zone. LSU gets those 13 points (minimum) it is a whole different game.
Fans should be used to the SEC fixing games by this point.
The refs killed THREE scores for LSU last night. The PI that was picked up and the "hold" that would have had us in the red zone. LSU gets those 13 points (minimum) it is a whole different game.
Fans should be used to the SEC fixing games by this point.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:32 am to blueboxer1119
Only metric we need to know- Would it have been ruled a TD for Alabama? No way they don't give them the TD, so I say it was a TD then.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:35 am to JYD
The first thing I couldn’t stop thinking about during the review last night was how Early Doucets catch against Arizona State in 2005 was secured for way less time than the catch last night and it wasn’t even reviewed. Yes I know the rules have changed since then but honestly who knows what the definition of a catch is anymore in college or nfl?
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:40 am to themunch
Lacy didn’t get blasted. He got bumped and dropped the ball. It was a lame arse effort. This is the SEC, hold on to the damn ball. He also looked disinterested in the outcome as did the rest of the team.
Very poor showing by the players last night. None of them looked like they understood what was at stake.
Very poor showing by the players last night. None of them looked like they understood what was at stake.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:44 am to bigbowe80
quote:
The first thing I couldn’t stop thinking about during the review last night was how Early Doucets catch against Arizona State in 2005 was secured for way less time than the catch last night and it wasn’t even reviewed. Yes I know the rules have changed since then but honestly who knows what the definition of a catch is anymore in college or nfl?
I had the same thoughts. That was more of a catch than Early's catch in 2005 imo
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:46 am to 33inNC
quote:
Would it have been ruled a TD for Alabama?
Of course, because the correct call was TD all the way.
Just like they would have never picked up the obvious PI flag on Bama, nor called that "hold" that negated a HUGE play on us after we were trying to recover from the Fumble 6.
LSU wasn't winning that game last night. Those three blatant calls were perfectly timed to cost LSU three scores.
LSU didn't belong in the top 4 anyway. I get why the SEC rigged it.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:47 am to ibleedprplngld
quote:
Didn’t complete the catch to the ground. Pretty text book
I’m not sure that it is. The rules say you must complete the catch in the field of play or the end zone. The argument can be made he satisfied the catch criteria when he turned to advanced through contact with a defender. The ball would be dead at that point since the catch was made in the end zone.
Again, I’m just providing commentary on why I think this rule, or set of rules, is seriously flawed. Based on the rule wording it can almost always be argued by both teams.
IMO, people typically get hung up on “firm grasp”. That’s what they see and what they stick with. If a guy in fact catches the ball and then it gets knocked out (or recovers a fumble and then it gets knocked out), it’s hard to get past that point for a viewer, they don’t understand that an act subsequent to the firm grasp is applied retroactively nullifying what would otherwise be a catch/recovery. If the only way to determine if the sequence of events resulted in a catch is by looking at replay, then the call on the field shouldn’t be relevant.
The rules should be simplified and the game should be officiated accordingly.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:47 am to L S Usetheforce
The replay analyst on the broadcast explained it well. Upright receiver vs a receiver going to the ground. If he’s ruled as an upright receiver, he doesn’t have to maintain possession all the way to the ground since the catch is complete and the play is over once he has possession in the end zone. If he’s a receiver going to the ground, then he has to maintain possession all the way to the ground to complete the catch.
He was upright, caught the ball, and only went to the ground from being hit after he already had possession. It was a bang bang play and the ref on the field said the call on the field “stands” not that it was “confirmed”. So probably not clear enough for replay to overturn whichever way the call on the field went.
He was upright, caught the ball, and only went to the ground from being hit after he already had possession. It was a bang bang play and the ref on the field said the call on the field “stands” not that it was “confirmed”. So probably not clear enough for replay to overturn whichever way the call on the field went.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:50 am to Tiger Prawn
please post pic
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:51 am to blueboxer1119
quote:
When is the moment it flips to a "catch"? When he's out of bounds? So for it to be a "catch", it has to be "completed" out of bounds.
This is correct. That’s the argument I am making, it is really just too difficult of a standard for the average viewer to understand, and mix in the inconsistency in which it is ruled and the result is one team will always be mad on questionable catches.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:58 am to Bayou
Upright, not going to the ground to make the catch. Play should be dead right there as he has possession and feet down in the end zone
Posted on 11/27/22 at 8:59 am to Tiger Prawn
And after that pic he took two steps with the ball. Just absurd to call it incomplete both on the field and in replay.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 9:01 am to Tiger Prawn
quote:
It was a bang bang play and the ref on the field said the call on the field “stands” not that it was “confirmed”. So probably not clear enough for replay to overturn whichever way the call on the field went.
This is my frustration with replay in general. It is supposed to correct plays that were called wrong in real time. Instead, we’ve created this system that has to “confirm” an error with “substantial evidence” opposed to admitting a call was bad in the first place.
This ultimately stems to a much larger issue football has in general, overcomplicating simple rules (what is a catch?) and the expansion of human judgment with no course correction.
Posted on 11/27/22 at 9:06 am to Mister Flawless
It shouldn’t have even been a tough review - “he was upright, the official on the field misapplied the rule, call reversed”.
When even Greg F’in McElroy can get there…
When even Greg F’in McElroy can get there…
Posted on 11/27/22 at 9:09 am to ForeverEllisHugh
The rule, as applied, seems to be basically encouraging defenders to hit players out of bounds.
Page 2 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News