- 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
Rule Question on Jamar Chase NON-TD call
Posted on 1/23/23 at 3:52 pm
Posted on 1/23/23 at 3:52 pm
I get what the rule is, but the might want to look at this. Skip Bayless made this point and I tend to agree. Chase catches the ball, secures it, has possession, gets two feet down in the end zone. THEN, the DB dislodges and the ball moves and when Chase is falling out of the end zone, he has to reestablish control after his feet leave the end zone. He holds it when it hits the ground, but it moved as he was falling out of the end zone because the DB dislodged it AFTER Chase had it with two feet down.
Shouldn't the play have ended when he had control with two feet down in the end zone? Just like if a runner crosses the plain of the end zone? A defensive player cannot knock the ball out after the runner crosses the goal line. Shouldn’t the fact that the ball was dislodged by the DB on the way out of the end zone be overridden by the fact that Chase already had possession? Plus, it was ruled a catch on the field. I’m not sure that should have been overturned.
If that happens in the field of play, a DB can't knock it out of a WR's hands in the end zone after he catches it. What is so magical about falling out of bounds that makes that area fair game to dislodge the ball? Why does a WR have to all the way to the ground if he catches a ball, secures it, and has two feet down - Chase got THREE feet down.
I think this rule, or interpretation of the rule, is worth revisiting in the offseason. As it turns out, it didn't affect the final result of the game as the Bengals dominated, but it could affect a playoff game in the future.
Shouldn't the play have ended when he had control with two feet down in the end zone? Just like if a runner crosses the plain of the end zone? A defensive player cannot knock the ball out after the runner crosses the goal line. Shouldn’t the fact that the ball was dislodged by the DB on the way out of the end zone be overridden by the fact that Chase already had possession? Plus, it was ruled a catch on the field. I’m not sure that should have been overturned.
If that happens in the field of play, a DB can't knock it out of a WR's hands in the end zone after he catches it. What is so magical about falling out of bounds that makes that area fair game to dislodge the ball? Why does a WR have to all the way to the ground if he catches a ball, secures it, and has two feet down - Chase got THREE feet down.
I think this rule, or interpretation of the rule, is worth revisiting in the offseason. As it turns out, it didn't affect the final result of the game as the Bengals dominated, but it could affect a playoff game in the future.
This post was edited on 1/23/23 at 4:01 pm
9
Posted on 1/23/23 at 3:56 pm to AlaTiger
The review in this instance makes no sense. That was a catch and in real time, no one would argue otherwise. Reviewing it into split seconds takes away from the game, IMO.
Posted on 1/23/23 at 4:01 pm to AlaTiger
Took 4 points from the Bengals. It was ok though because Burrow and company played well enough to bust the script.
Posted on 1/23/23 at 4:03 pm to AlaTiger
quote:
Skip Bayless made this point
See yourself out.
Posted on 1/23/23 at 4:07 pm to AlaTiger
the rule is stupid. like many.
but I am utterly fricking exhausted at the over analysis of every catch, almost every play, to see if it “was really a catch” or “if his knee was down” or if the spot was exactly correct.
And i’m ok with having a review, but the announcers, and now having a retired NFL referee on call to join in on the over-analysis, only to be contradicted on the actual call is exhausting.
but I am utterly fricking exhausted at the over analysis of every catch, almost every play, to see if it “was really a catch” or “if his knee was down” or if the spot was exactly correct.
And i’m ok with having a review, but the announcers, and now having a retired NFL referee on call to join in on the over-analysis, only to be contradicted on the actual call is exhausting.
Posted on 1/23/23 at 4:10 pm to AlaTiger
quote:
Skip Bayless made this point and I tend to agree
Stopped reading right here.
Posted on 1/23/23 at 4:10 pm to AlaTiger
I covered this in my thread. But, here is the rule:
A, B, and C have to happen. A and B clearly happened. Chase then satisfied (c) by getting a 3rd foot in bounds ("take and additional step") prior to the ball moving. After (c) was satisfied it was 100% a catch regardless of what happened after.
quote:
COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS
A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) in the field of play, at the sideline, or in the end zone if a player, who is inbounds:
a. secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
b. touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
c. after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.
Notes:
Movement of the ball does not automatically result in loss of control.
If a player, who satisfied (a) and (b), but has not satisfied (c), contacts the ground and loses control of the ball, it is an incomplete pass if the ball hits the ground before he regains control, or if he regains control out of bounds
A, B, and C have to happen. A and B clearly happened. Chase then satisfied (c) by getting a 3rd foot in bounds ("take and additional step") prior to the ball moving. After (c) was satisfied it was 100% a catch regardless of what happened after.
Posted on 1/23/23 at 4:15 pm to hashtag
quote:
I covered this in my thread. But, here is the rule:
The point is that the rules are fricking retarded.
Posted on 1/23/23 at 4:52 pm to AlaTiger
quote:I have no idea what a catch is any more but as I understand it, a catch on a non-TD/not out of bounds would not automatically be a catch based on what you said because the receiver needs to make a football move(speaking of having no clue, zero clue what a football move is any more, but I digress.)
I get what the rule is, but the might want to look at this. Skip Bayless made this point and I tend to agree. Chase catches the ball, secures it, has possession, gets two feet down in the end zone. THEN, the DB dislodges and the ball moves and when Chase is falling out of the end zone, he has to reestablish control after his feet leave the end zone. He holds it when it hits the ground, but it moved as he was falling out of the end zone because the DB dislodged it AFTER Chase had it with two feet down.
The ones in the endzone for a TD, you obviously won't make a football move, so my understanding is you instead have to have possession all the way through to the ground.
Posted on 1/23/23 at 5:35 pm to AlaTiger
Every since Calvin Johnson made that play the interpretation of a catch in the NFL has been jacked up. See Dez Bryant at Lambeau. Under the rules Chase’s wasn’t a catch but the rule as applied is silly.
Posted on 1/23/23 at 5:56 pm to AlaTiger
Bengals won why are we still talking about this?
I'll be starting another thread in 3,2,1...
I'll be starting another thread in 3,2,1...
Posted on 1/23/23 at 6:22 pm to BFANLC
The WR must catch the ball in bounds, get two feet down, and retain clear and sturdy possession of the ball all the way to the bench and can only surrender possession of the ball to the white hat for the following play.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News