PDA

View Full Version : Foster's "Incompletion" Should Have Been a TD


GuerillaBlack
11-09-2010, 11:06 PM
On the play, the former NFL Vice President of Officiating, Mike Pereira, wrote on FoxSports.com:

“In my opinion, the ruling of touchdown should not have been reversed and this call seemed to change the complexion of the game…Foster was on his way to the ground and reached out with the ball in his right hand to make sure that he had broken the plane. This is the ’second act’ that the league has referred to in the past."

http://www.texansgab.com/2010/11/09/mike-pereira-says-fosters-incompletion-should-have-been-a-td/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TexansGab+%28Texans+Gab%29&utm_content=Twitter

And here is a link to the story at FoxSports: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Austin-Collie-injury-hit-helmet-penalty-referee-Week-9-110710

So, there you go. I think almost everyone thought it should have been a TD. Bad call by the refs here. I really don't want that Mike guy reffing another game for us again...especially at Reliant. Anyone remember how loud and authoritative he was when he yelled "it stands" after the "interception" at the end of the game (I believe that was the play). I was wondering to myself why he was yelling, especially when the call is against the home team.

TEXANRED
11-09-2010, 11:09 PM
http://www.texansgab.com/2010/11/09/mike-pereira-says-fosters-incompletion-should-have-been-a-td/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TexansGab+%28Texans+Gab%29&utm_content=Twitter

So, there you go. I think almost everyone thought it should have been a TD. Bad call by the refs here. I really don't want that Mike guy reffing another game for us again...especially at Reliant.

There were a lot of bad calls in this game. The Foster play and the intentional grounding call was all wrong.

I have a friend who is a heavy gambler and he preaches to me how all games are rigged and I am starting to believe it.

Corrosion
11-10-2010, 05:55 AM
When you compare the Foster non-TD to the one by Detroit a few weeks back ..... the rule was followed to the letter. :smiliepalm:

TheMatrix31
11-10-2010, 06:17 AM
Sorry don't get us 7 points on the board.

**sigh**

thunderkyss
11-10-2010, 07:26 AM
There were a lot of bad calls in this game. The Foster play and the intentional grounding call was all wrong.



Why do you think the intentional grounding call was wrong?

thunderkyss
11-10-2010, 07:36 AM
When you compare the Foster non-TD to the one by Detroit a few weeks back ..... the rule was followed to the letter. :smiliepalm:

In Detroit, CJ was in the air when the ball hit his hands. He had control of the ball, but never had his feet down, or any part of his body down that would constitute possession.

When his butt hit the ground, so did the ball. He was in the act of making a catch when he went to the ground. The rule is he has to maintain possession through the fall to be ruled a catch.

I don't have a problem with that one being ruled an incomplete pass.

Foster caught the ball outside the end zone. He has possession, before he turns and extends into the end zone. Foster's play is more like Colt McCoys scrambling touchdown or Peyton Hillis' dive into the endzone where he loses the ball as it hits the pylon.

Either way we lost the game, my opinion of how they played still wouldn't have changed, I know we've got an offense that can score 30 on any given day so we've always got a chance to win. I was pleased that we had success early & was in the game for 60 minutes. Still peaved that KJ got burned twice, on simple go routes..... that is not supposed to happen, his physical play at the line was one of his strongest selling points. The defense didn't get that last stop that they needed...... doesn't matter how many points they actually gave up (23 by the defense, not 30). They needed a stop, didn't get it. Allowed a touchdown, not a field goal.

The outcome of the game would have been different. The fans (myself included) would have felt differently about the win. But fans of football which includes most of the people on this board would understand we still have work to do.

Malloy
11-10-2010, 08:04 AM
Why do you think the intentional grounding call was wrong?

I'm thinking it's either a incompletion, or a PI call against the guy covering Dreessen.

Thorn
11-10-2010, 08:50 AM
Bad call or the right call, what difference does it make? If the Texans were good enough to win the game they would have, bad call or not.

infantrycak
11-10-2010, 10:01 AM
Why do you think the intentional grounding call was wrong?

Well maybe because none of the requirements of the rule were met. First to get called for intentional grounding you have to be under pressure. That's why spiking the ball doesn't count as intentional grounding. Schaub was not under pressure. Second there was a receiver in the area. You can watch any weekend and see QB's divot the ball 10 yards short of eligible receiver who is too well covered and not have a flag called when they are clearly under pressure and just trying to get rid of the ball.

Ole Miss Texan
11-10-2010, 10:09 AM
That Foster "incompletion" was such B.S. I really think we would have won had they called it right. Wasn't it called a TD and they overturned it? I forget b/c I was so busy yelling.

As far as Schaub intentionally grounding the ball? I would say yes he intentionally threw it away... but that's not a penalty. Like many said, he wasn't pressured, he threw it past the line of scrimmage and the TE was in the vicinity. It was an obvious throw away but that doesn't mean it was a penalty. Bad call by the refs.

thunderkyss
11-10-2010, 10:12 AM
I'm thinking it's either a incompletion, or a PI call against the guy covering Dreessen.

See, I think it shouldn't be called intentional grounding, because Schaub wasn't under duress.

QBs throw the ball away in that same situation & it is never called.

It is intentional grounding if he's about to get hit, is wrapped up, or on his way down.

TexansWest
11-10-2010, 10:14 AM
My high school head coach always told us, "you have to be better than the other team, it's fans, and the referees". "Referees are human and make mistakes and you must be good enough to overcome them". Face it, the Texans just aren't good enough, period!!!!!

HJam72
11-10-2010, 10:26 AM
There were a lot of bad calls in this game. The Foster play and the intentional grounding call was all wrong.

I have a friend who is a heavy gambler and he preaches to me how all games are rigged and I am starting to believe it.

OK, what kinds of things does he say???

I've been suspecting this about all 3 of our popular pro sports in this country for a long time.

BigBull17
11-10-2010, 10:27 AM
They need to start fining refs for making huge mistakes. They fine players for wrong socks.

jaayteetx
11-10-2010, 10:36 AM
My high school head coach always told us, "you have to be better than the other team, it's fans, and the referees". "Referees are human and make mistakes and you must be good enough to overcome them". Face it, the Texans just aren't good enough, period!!!!!

Thats a bunch of BS. Teams in the league are so damn close to each other, that any little thing can swing a game in the other direction. A ref constantly screwing one team can and WILL change the outcome of a game.

thunderkyss
11-10-2010, 11:31 AM
They need to start fining refs for making huge mistakes. They fine players for wrong socks.

How do you know they don't ?

Double Barrel
11-10-2010, 11:36 AM
The refs are becoming much too visible in the NFL for my tastes. It waters down the product and brings too much human fallibility into play as it regards the outcome of games. I'm steadily growing weary of this trend and find myself on the verge of total apathy as a result.

Texan_Bill
11-10-2010, 11:39 AM
http://www.texansgab.com/2010/11/09/mike-pereira-says-fosters-incompletion-should-have-been-a-td/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TexansGab+%28Texans+Gab%29&utm_content=Twitter

And here is a link to the story at FoxSports: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Austin-Collie-injury-hit-helmet-penalty-referee-Week-9-110710

So, there you go. I think almost everyone thought it should have been a TD. Bad call by the refs here. I really don't want that Mike guy reffing another game for us again...especially at Reliant. Anyone remember how loud and authoritative he was when he yelled "it stands" after the "interception" at the end of the game (I believe that was the play). I was wondering to myself why he was yelling, especially when the call is against the home team.

Mike Pereira did a total flip-flop (yeah, there's a surprise :rolleyes: ) from his explanation on Calvin Johnson's incomplete.TD pass.

Dutchrudder
11-10-2010, 11:55 AM
It should have been called a touchdown because Foster makes the catch and then tries to extend the ball across the line, but he didn't realize he was already in the end zone. That extension should have been ruled a 'football move' and then a 'fumble', but you can't fumble in the end zone because it was already a TD.

The Cush
11-10-2010, 11:57 AM
Here's what was different about Foster's non-TD to Calvin's non-TD, he caught the ball BEFORE he broke the plane. So when he caught it then stretched out to break the plane I thought it didnt matter what you did after that, once the plane is broken I assumed thats a touchdown

Dread-Head
11-10-2010, 12:10 PM
In the words of Thesbian David Hyde Pierce:

"Well Duh mother#cuker!"

Translation...we got Buttafuccoed....

TimeKiller
11-10-2010, 12:23 PM
Yeah, that Intentional grounding was an eye opener.

NO WAY IN HELL Manning gets that flag. Dreesen was in the area, yeah, he put it out of reach but that's not the rule is it?

The Foster TD that wasn't, I thought it was a TD period but I knew it was going to be overturned before they said anything.

I'll say one thing, I saw too many Texans receivers looking for bail-out flags after incompletions. Players play. Referees referee.

infantrycak
11-10-2010, 01:48 PM
Here's what was different about Foster's non-TD to Calvin's non-TD, he caught the ball BEFORE he broke the plane.

No what matters is whether you are going to the ground when you get the ball. If you are you must maintain possession thru contact with the ground endzone or not. If you are not going to the ground that doesn't apply.

Mike Pereira did a total flip-flop (yeah, there's a surprise :rolleyes: ) from his explanation on Calvin Johnson's incomplete.TD pass.

There is no flip flop at all. Calvin Johnson was in the air and clearly never going to land on his feet when he got his hands on the ball. He was going to the ground. Foster was on his feet and but for being hit would have run it out. He was not going to the ground.

DerekLee1
11-10-2010, 01:54 PM
When you compare the Foster non-TD to the one by Detroit a few weeks back ..... the rule was followed to the letter. :smiliepalm:

Disagree. The CJ TD, there was only one move: the catch, but he was rolling as he caught it, which complicated things. While I personally believe it was still a catch, it was different than Foster's. Foster caught the ball with two hands, secured it, made a second move to cross the plane by reaching his hand out with the ball. Once that ball crossed the plane, there was a catch, control, ball crosses the plane, play is dead once it crosses. Nothing after that mattered.

BigBull17
11-10-2010, 01:54 PM
Well shucks, they were wrong. It isn't a big deal. Not like every game counts in the NFL.

Malloy
11-11-2010, 08:22 AM
The refs are becoming much too visible in the NFL for my tastes. It waters down the product and brings too much human fallibility into play as it regards the outcome of games. I'm steadily growing weary of this trend and find myself on the verge of total apathy as a result.

At least we have the possibility of challenging, something sorely missing in Soccer...

El Tejano
11-11-2010, 08:38 AM
http://www.texansgab.com/2010/11/09/mike-pereira-says-fosters-incompletion-should-have-been-a-td/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TexansGab+%28Texans+Gab%29&utm_content=Twitter

And here is a link to the story at FoxSports: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Austin-Collie-injury-hit-helmet-penalty-referee-Week-9-110710

So, there you go. I think almost everyone thought it should have been a TD. Bad call by the refs here. I really don't want that Mike guy reffing another game for us again...especially at Reliant. Anyone remember how loud and authoritative he was when he yelled "it stands" after the "interception" at the end of the game (I believe that was the play). I was wondering to myself why he was yelling, especially when the call is against the home team.

The one you are reffering to was the SD int at the end of the game. That came after Schaub was giving him an earful about the intentional grounding. I thought I was the only one that noticed his attitude on the call but I guess if we both can notice it, it's safe to assume he was glad to see us lose that day.

El Tejano
11-11-2010, 08:39 AM
I bet if we were Pittsburgh, that would've been a TD.

Showtime100
11-11-2010, 08:44 AM
The one you are reffering to was the SD int at the end of the game. That came after Schaub was giving him an earful about the intentional grounding. I thought I was the only one that noticed his attitude on the call but I guess if we both can notice it, it's safe to assume he was glad to see us lose that day.

Yeah, I noticed the emphatic "it stands" call and was a little pissed about the joy he got out of it.

El Tejano
11-11-2010, 09:07 AM
Yeah, I noticed the emphatic "it stands" call and was a little pissed about the joy he got out of it.

And by the way he was doing the color commentating, I bet Dan Fouts and that ref had a cold one afterwards and were laughing and high fiving about it after the game.

Can we please not get guys to not call games when the team that is playing is the one they made hall of fame careers with?

HuttoKarl
11-11-2010, 09:57 AM
Shoulda woulda coulda...they screwed up.

We got effed.

We lost.

Time to crush the Jags.

Blake
11-11-2010, 10:12 AM
Here's what was different about Foster's non-TD to Calvin's non-TD, he caught the ball BEFORE he broke the plane. So when he caught it then stretched out to break the plane I thought it didnt matter what you did after that, once the plane is broken I assumed thats a touchdown

I am with you. Foster caught the ball and broke the plane. That my friend is a touchdown.

"Touchdown: When any part of the ball, legally in possession of a player inbounds, breaks the plane of the opponent’s goal line, provided it is not a touchback."

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/definitions

:mariopalm: NFL!

GuerillaBlack
11-11-2010, 10:30 AM
The one you are reffering to was the SD int at the end of the game. That came after Schaub was giving him an earful about the intentional grounding. I thought I was the only one that noticed his attitude on the call but I guess if we both can notice it, it's safe to assume he was glad to see us lose that day.

Not to mention he was the only ref that didn't even want to discuss overturning the intentional grounding call. It was like it was his way, or the highway. I hate that ref.

Double Barrel
11-11-2010, 11:03 AM
And by the way he was doing the color commentating, I bet Dan Fouts and that ref had a cold one afterwards and were laughing and high fiving about it after the game.

Can we please not get guys to not call games when the team that is playing is the one they made hall of fame careers with?

I agree completely. The drooling by Fouts was getting my floor wet.

gtexan02
11-11-2010, 11:07 AM
Explanation by NFL here
http://bit.ly/dnb94o

False Start
11-11-2010, 11:07 AM
Yeah, I noticed the emphatic "it stands" call and was a little pissed about the joy he got out of it.

Yeah, that got to me too. :pissed:

rush2112mn
11-11-2010, 11:59 AM
I think it was a touchdown.....I think the refs made a mistake on that one......who knows what would have happened if it was ruled a touchdown instead....

Blake
11-11-2010, 12:01 PM
Explanation by NFL here
http://bit.ly/dnb94o

Now aint that some bullshit. I am in the camp that he caught the ball and had possession before crossing the goal line.

Showtime100
11-11-2010, 12:10 PM
Now aint that some bullshit. I am in the camp that he caught the ball and had possession before crossing the goal line.

Same here. Also, I can't believe that a league as dependent on replay as the NFL doesn't get their own cameras out there at predetermined strategic spots. Like, say, looking down the goal line.

Let the networks put theirs in where they want and use whatever shots they get from the play, but I would like to see some cameras out there strictly for the purpose of catching good angles. I don't know how much it would help, but it wouldn't hurt.

Yankee_In_TX
11-11-2010, 12:17 PM
When you compare the Foster non-TD to the one by Detroit a few weeks back ..... the rule was followed to the letter. :smiliepalm:

...and several from the last few years - where a WR catches the ball, takes 4 steps (3 in the endzone), falls down, does 4 barrel rolls and loses the ball after the 4th roll and they rule incomplete.

Dumbest rule ever.

disaacks3
11-11-2010, 12:38 PM
Disagree. The CJ TD, there was only one move: the catch, but he was rolling as he caught it, which complicated things. While I personally believe it was still a catch, it was different than Foster's. Foster caught the ball with two hands, secured it, made a second move to cross the plane by reaching his hand out with the ball. Once that ball crossed the plane, there was a catch, control, ball crosses the plane, play is dead once it crosses. Nothing after that mattered. My thought at the time exactly.

At least we have the possibility of challenging, something sorely missing in Soccer... Unfortunately, that's what GOT us in this one. The officials BLEW the replay call.

Same here. Also, I can't believe that a league as dependent on replay as the NFL doesn't get their own cameras out there at predetermined strategic spots. Like, say, looking down the goal line.

Let the networks put theirs in where they want and use whatever shots they get from the play, but I would like to see some cameras out there strictly for the purpose of catching good angles. I don't know how much it would help, but it wouldn't hurt. I've thought this for years. Why should the Monday/Thursday/Sunday night games get more / better angles? Sure it makes for great TV, but every game needs to have the same angles to review FROM.

Double Barrel
11-11-2010, 12:48 PM
Same here. Also, I can't believe that a league as dependent on replay as the NFL doesn't get their own cameras out there at predetermined strategic spots. Like, say, looking down the goal line.

Let the networks put theirs in where they want and use whatever shots they get from the play, but I would like to see some cameras out there strictly for the purpose of catching good angles. I don't know how much it would help, but it wouldn't hurt.

Great idea. After all, it's only a multi-billion dollar entertainment industry we're talking about here.

thunderkyss
11-11-2010, 12:59 PM
...and several from the last few years - where a WR catches the ball, takes 4 steps (3 in the endzone), falls down, does 4 barrel rolls and loses the ball after the 4th roll and they rule incomplete.

Dumbest rule ever.

Remember Jacoby Jones had a similar catch last year. I don't remember against who. He caught the ball, falling down into the endzone, & clearly didn't have the ball when the play was over.


But they gave it to us & we won the game.



It's Karma. Which is why even though I'm a sunshiner, Kubiak gets no credit for this one. We got screwed, deal with it. There will not be a "we would have won 11 games & in the play offs if we didn't get screwed on the Foster TD in the Chargers game" argument from me.

But I do believe some of this venom pointed Gary's way at the moment should be tempered. The game plan may not have been what we wanted, but it was good enough to win. The players played good enough to win. It just didn't happen.

It makes it tougher for Gary & the team going forward, but that's the NFL. He can either deal with it or not.

Goatcheese
11-11-2010, 03:32 PM
Explanation by NFL here
http://bit.ly/dnb94o

I vote to fire this nitwit along with the head official. They're both idiots.

HJam72
11-11-2010, 06:55 PM
Remember Jacoby Jones had a similar catch last year. I don't remember against who. He caught the ball, falling down into the endzone, & clearly didn't have the ball when the play was over.


But they gave it to us & we won the game.



It's Karma. Which is why even though I'm a sunshiner, Kubiak gets no credit for this one. We got screwed, deal with it. There will not be a "we would have won 11 games & in the play offs if we didn't get screwed on the Foster TD in the Chargers game" argument from me.

But I do believe some of this venom pointed Gary's way at the moment should be tempered. The game plan may not have been what we wanted, but it was good enough to win. The players played good enough to win. It just didn't happen.

It makes it tougher for Gary & the team going forward, but that's the NFL. He can either deal with it or not.

Well, there will be from me, dang it. It's momentum. Even if we lose all the rest of our games, it could be because of that one horrible call by the refs!!!!!! :brickwall:


:jk:

Pantherstang84
11-11-2010, 07:09 PM
I vote to fire this nitwit along with the head official. They're both idiots.

Did you really expect this tool to come out and say they got it wrong? Of course he was going to cover for his boys in the field.

Showtime100
11-11-2010, 07:16 PM
Did you really expect this tool to come out and say they got it wrong? Of course he was going to cover for his boys in the field.

I sure did. It isn't like they've never come out after the fact and said they screwed up. Doesn't matter anyway. I feel the same whether they say it was a good or bad call. :smiliepalm:

TexanBacker93
11-11-2010, 08:32 PM
See, I think it shouldn't be called intentional grounding, because Schaub wasn't under duress.

QBs throw the ball away in that same situation & it is never called.

It is intentional grounding if he's about to get hit, is wrapped up, or on his way down.

My problem with the play is what prevented Schaub from trying to make a play to Dreessen? Put the ball in a spot where only your guy could get it and make it look like you are actually trying to complete the pass. Don't let the refs make a judgment call.

infantrycak
11-11-2010, 09:06 PM
Remember Jacoby Jones had a similar catch last year. I don't remember against who. He caught the ball, falling down into the endzone, & clearly didn't have the ball when the play was over.

But they gave it to us & we won the game.

It's Karma.

No it is the rule. Jacoby maintained possession through his first roll semi-got to his feet and hit then the ball came out. Pereira explained after that play that you only have to maintain possession through the ground once.

TexanBacker93
11-12-2010, 06:02 AM
After watching last night's Heap TD I really can't see how Foster's wasn't a TD. Heap didn't maintain possession any longer than Foster. I really hate the NFLs rules regarding TDs. I don't think that having the ball cross some imaginary plane should automatically give the team a TD. The David Carr play against the Jags is an example where we benefited, but he didn't keep possession of the ball and it shouldn't have been a TD.

Yankee_In_TX
11-12-2010, 08:58 AM
...and watching TNF we have learned a new facet of the rule - if you don't fall down all you have to do is catch the ball in the endzone and make a football move and it is a TD (Todd Heap had the ball punched out while in motion).

The ref specifically pointed out the receiver never left his feet, lol.

Yankee_In_TX
11-12-2010, 08:59 AM
After watching last night's Heap TD I really can't see how Foster's wasn't a TD. Heap didn't maintain possession any longer than Foster. I really hate the NFLs rules regarding TDs. I don't think that having the ball cross some imaginary plane should automatically give the team a TD. The David Carr play against the Jags is an example where we benefited, but he didn't keep possession of the ball and it shouldn't have been a TD.

LOL, I just posted that. Only thing I figure is because Arian 'fell?'

gtexan02
11-12-2010, 09:00 AM
LOL, I just posted that. Only thing I figure is because Arian 'fell?'

Exactly. According to the NFL VP of rules, going to the ground was considered the act of catching for Foster

Blake
11-12-2010, 09:20 AM
LOL, I just posted that. Only thing I figure is because Arian 'fell?'

Exactly. According to the NFL VP of rules, going to the ground was considered the act of catching for Foster

So many fans hate these interpretations of the rules. They are going to have to fix this in the off-season.

This rule is the equivalent of hitting a home-run that smacks a fan in the face and falls back into the field of play. Yeah you made a great play and hit a HR, but your ball didn't maintain itself in the bleachers. BLEH!
:mariopalm:

Yankee_In_TX
11-12-2010, 11:06 AM
So many fans hate these interpretations of the rules. They are going to have to fix this in the off-season.

This rule is the equivalent of hitting a home-run that smacks a fan in the face and falls back into the field of play. Yeah you made a great play and hit a HR, but your ball didn't maintain itself in the bleachers. BLEH!
:mariopalm:

The reason I don't think it will change is because about 2-3 TD's are disallowed each year and they haven't changed it yet. I think I first noticed this 'controversy' 3 years ago.

infantrycak
11-12-2010, 11:22 AM
The reason I don't think it will change is because about 2-3 TD's are disallowed each year and they haven't changed it yet. I think I first noticed this 'controversy' 3 years ago.

I doubt the base rule changes but I wouldn't be at all surprised to see an enforcement clarification.

Yankee_In_TX
11-12-2010, 11:29 AM
I doubt the base rule changes but I wouldn't be at all surprised to see an enforcement clarification.

I think they did that last night - the ref was VERY specific as to the review of Heap's TD. I wish I could quote it, but he specifically mentioned Heap never left his feet.

GuerillaBlack
11-12-2010, 01:35 PM
I think they did that last night - the ref was VERY specific as to the review of Heap's TD. I wish I could quote it, but he specifically mentioned Heap never left his feet.

He said something like "the receiver caught the ball, made two steps, which is a football move, and then had the ball punched out. Therefore, it is a touchdown." It was a great explanation. Wish he was our ref last Sunday.

DerekLee1
11-12-2010, 01:39 PM
What gets me the worst about this call is that it was OVERTURNED. The referee actually went to the replay booth and FOUND CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE to overturn the call on the field? THAT'S the biggest travesty.

zanth91
11-12-2010, 01:43 PM
Mike Carey strikes again...

playa465
11-12-2010, 07:13 PM
this rule is the equivalent of hitting a home-run that smacks a fan in the face and falls back into the field of play. Yeah you made a great play and hit a hr, but your ball didn't maintain itself in the bleachers. Bleh!
:mariopalm:

lmao...