Originally posted by Bluehorseshoe
-
Why do people keep saying this when the NFL's top official said it was the correct call? How do you know more about the rule than he does?Originally posted by Dark HorseComment -
I agree. They tried to force the rule where there was obviously a catch. If he bobbled, or somehow didn't have possession when the ball touched the ground, I believe the continuation rule would have come into effect.Originally posted by BluehorseshoeComment -
I'm a Bears fan and even I will admit Detroit got hosed.Comment -
That is not what happened. When did he lose control??? After he held it for a td. Two steps and control. What would you like?Originally posted by jgray
Comment -
Spot on. They made the proper call based on a flawed rule. Simple as that.Originally posted by jgrayComment -
It's not. A ref could call a holding penalty whenever he wants. Every offensive lineman is forced to grab an opponents jersey when a play starts. It's up to the ref to decide when it's excessive. Some idiot ref could decide after a half a second it's holding and still be within the rule.Originally posted by d2betsComment -
This isn't a holding call. This is a very clear look at the play in light of the rules. The rule needs to be changed. But the rule is very clear that you have to maintain the ball through the play. He lost the ball while on the ground. By the letter of the law, it is not a catch. They should just simply change the rule to make it a catch like anywhere else on the field. If that exact play had been a sideline play, it is a catch by the rules. Two feet with possession. But the rule in the endzone is different. Why? I don't see any goods reason. The refs got it right by the book and it highlights a flaw in the rulebook. But you really can't blame the refs for following the rulebook.Originally posted by BluehorseshoeComment -
I had a prop play that Megatron would catch a TD... We were robbed!Comment -
I was on lions ml and am still convinced that lions would miss two point conversion to go up 3 and bears would win on a field goal at the end.Comment -
Fukk the continuation and the process, that was BS and cost me on the ML. TD all the way. The only continuation and process is the continuation of the NFL to process bad calls.Comment -
NFL needs to check itself!Comment -
I feel like NFL refs cannot go one week (16 games) without controversy.Comment -
Originally posted by homerbush
Sometimes I think I may be naive for thinking officials are unbias or not bought off. But as time goes on it seems like calls keep getting worse in every sport.Comment -
letter of the lawComment -
They really do. I think about now in all sports versus even 10 years ago. Just keeps getting worse.Originally posted by HammewComment -
Wasnt he down when his arse hit the ground ? Meaning the play is complete.Comment -
Same thing happened last year Oak vs. SD. Same "process" call. Bad rule. But that is the rule. Maybe they'll change it now. Two feet with posession ought to be enough.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvGEL2DxPEgComment -
No. Look at the next post. Same thing happened to Oakland last year. Gotta keep possession through rolling on the ground.Originally posted by Wade DwayneComment -
that was the worse call ive seen in years......Comment -
Hate the rule not the refs that applied the rule. I do have a question for everyone: If he had made that play on the 20, and then ran after the play, would it have counted as a catch, fumble, then him regaining the ball or would it have been ruled incomplete? I'm assuming it would be ruled incomplete but just want to check myself.Comment -
A fumble.Originally posted by Sox2010Comment -
Anywhere but the endzone that is a completion. Different rule applies to the endzone. Why, you ask? I have no friggin clue.Originally posted by Sox2010Comment -
The inconsistency is apparent. If you have to "complete" the catch, why don't you have to "complete" the dive when a running back jumps over into the end zone and loses possession of the football.
Answer: if you have possession of the ball and break the plane of the end zone, it is a touchdown. When Calvin was on his back in the end zone, that should have been the end of the play. The continuation was not in the spirit of the rule. The rule was intended to make sure players catching the ball and falling "completed the catch." There is inconsistency in this ruling, since there is a very real thought that calvin had already "completed" the catch..Comment -
horrible call. And brock landers says "at least the Lions covered"
It's not about gamblin you fukk
that was the difference between a W and a L
Cause Sleep is the Cousin of DeathComment -
I just read this whole line of conversation. First - the call was right. It was right when they made the call on the field and it was right after they reviewed it. As others have said - if you don't like the call then you need to take it up with the NFL - but it was the right call. Now for the question that I had when I saw it live at the game, and again after watching the multiple replays. Why did Johnson try and catch that with one hand? He had PLENTY of time to bring that ball into his body which would have basically ensured it was a TD. He was trying to make a highlight reel catch and it cost Lions the game!!
If you want to be mad at anyone - how about him?Comment -
a running back can smoke the pilon with the ball with his body out of bounds but this play is not called a touchdown.........
this league along with its commercial breaks is getting out of hand.Comment -
Since I had Chicago I thought it was a GREAT call! Otherwise it would have been one of the worst calls ever!Comment -
These refs should be happy they are in the NFL and not in Colombian soccer league because they would have probably been killed for such an obvious bad call.
It's pretty simple. You catch the ball with both feet down in the end zone it's a touchdown. You don't need to fly with the ball back to Detroit to be one.Comment -
Linky no worky but I presume you were mentioning the incomplete pass on a sure TD catch by Louis Murphy. That call and the one today are both BS. I understand the rule but it needs to change. It's bull shit. Johnson caught the ball and made a football move. He caught with 1 foot then did a hop step with 2 feet then fell to the ground on his butt all in control of the ball THEN rolled over and put the ball on the ground. Horrible rule that needs tweaking.Originally posted by d2betsComment -
that man caught the ball, took two steps, his knee and hand went down on the ground with the ball and then he let it go. I was thrilled my Bears got the win, but that was the worst call I have ever seen. If that's not a touchdown then what do you have to do? Tuck it in your shirt for a few seconds? That was a joke and all this rule changing and saftey reasons for penalties is changing the integrity of what the NFL used to be.Comment -
Ironically, the spot where he lost the ball is frozen in the video you posted...Originally posted by BluehorseshoeComment -
The level of ignorance in this thread is astounding. How can people still say it was a bad call? They followed the rulebook and the head of NFL officiating stated that it was the correct call and people still blame the refs. Be angry with the rule but it was the correct call.Originally posted by Dark HorseComment -
Lions was robbed
what the hell is a catch what a rip off two hands on the ball two feet on the ground and his buttt and not a catch what bullComment -
yes they wasComment -
you were robbed of basic English skillsComment
