PDA

View Full Version : Legit Td??


ajohnson80
12-07-2012, 12:29 AM
The third replay has a good view on it. It was reviewed and the refs ended up saying that because the catch started outside the endzone and it ended in the endzone that the bobble on the fall did not matter. I thought they made that rule very clear that on all catches you have to maintain possession throughout the fall by either rolling over or trapping with your arms underneath. Oh btw to add to any ref gambling conspiracies this play affected the spread.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/0ap2000000097574/QB-Rivers-to-WR-Alexander-21-yd-pass-TD-4th-down-conversion

Couch refs, is this a td or no?

brakos82
12-07-2012, 01:12 AM
Touchdown. He makes the catch, then makes a "football move" (getting the ball across the goal line.) Same thing as in Super Bowl 44 on the Saints 2-point conversion. It's not a crystal clear rule, but it's there.

PapaL
12-07-2012, 01:57 AM
Once the ball crosses the plain, the play is over. TD.

The megatron rule, complete catch and maintain possession, applies if the ball is caught in the end zone

Last year, maybe year before, Arian was incorrectly stripped of TD in a similar play.

ajohnson80
12-07-2012, 02:29 AM
Then why isn't it a catch if the player falls out of bounds or anywhere else on the field for that matter? The out of bounds line is a plain but that same play would be incomplete.

thunderkyss
12-07-2012, 06:58 AM
Then why isn't it a catch if the player falls out of bounds or anywhere else on the field for that matter? The out of bounds line is a plain but that same play would be incomplete.

That's just the way the rules have evolved over the years. Everyone agrees that a play is over once the ball crosses the plane of the goal line. What happens with the ball after that is irrelevant.

It's the same rule for the sideline. If a player has established possession & runs out of bounds, it doesn't matter if he drops it. The ball is marked where it was as he went out of bounds.

The player has to have possession in the field of play.

In that video, it isn't even questionable. Two feet down well before the goal line. The ball is clearly in his control as he turns his body, stretches for the goal line & breaks the plane. Play over.

Had he been anywhere else on the field that still would have been a catch. Even though it hit the ground, it doesn't appear to have moved in his hand or helped him secure the catch. Dude's got control of that ball all the way through.

infantrycak
12-07-2012, 09:02 AM
The "making a football move" rule does not appear in the NFL rulebook. It is one which has been developed by the refs. Mike Perreira has stated that directly on several occasions both when he was head ref and since.

The key rule is determining whether he was going to the ground as he is attempting to catch the ball. Anywhere on the field if the receiver is going to the ground he has to maintain possession through contact with the ground - that includes plays in which the receiver crosses the plane of the goal or sideline. Here he went up to get the ball and landed with two feet and that rule did not apply.

Rey
12-07-2012, 09:51 AM
Endzone or no endzone, looks like a catch to me.

I can see where someone could argue that he used the ground to control the ball, but to me it looks like he has control the whole way through.

ajohnson80
12-07-2012, 11:47 AM
I don't see how falling down is a football move. His momentum happened to carry him to the endzone. I see players get 2 feet down then fall at least 5 times a week and the premise the refs have been going by is that they must complete the process of the catch through the fall. It is called differently even if the catch is made from the endzone.

The ref even said that rule doesn't apply here because he fell from the 1 yd line into the endzone, and he admitted the ball was jostled on the ground. How can it be a touchdown if he didn't meet the requirements for a catch?

I guess it's a rule that in that exact situation you don't have to complete the process, although I haven't seen it called that way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqAuFs6Deko

From my understanding this is the standard where the ruling developed. I agree those should be catches but the refs have been pretty consistent in their ruling on this completing the process business.

ajohnson80
12-07-2012, 11:52 AM
I don't see how falling down is a football move. His momentum happened to carry him to the endzone. I see players get 2 feet down then fall at least 5 times a week and the premise the refs have been going by is that they must complete the process of the catch through the fall. It is called differently even if the catch is made from the endzone.

The ref even said that rule doesn't apply here because he fell from the 1 yd line into the endzone, and he admitted the ball was jostled on the ground. How can it be a touchdown if he didn't meet the requirements for a catch?

I guess it's a rule that in that exact situation you don't have to complete the process, although I haven't seen it called that way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqAuFs6Deko

Here he gets 2 feet and a butt down!

From my understanding this is the standard where the ruling developed. I agree those should be catches but the refs have been pretty consistent in their ruling on this completing the process business.