September 12, 201016 yr Do you want the refs to rule by the rulebook? It doesn't matter that he didn't go right down. Yes it does. If you catch the ball and take steps and go down then the ball pops out it's always ruled that the ground causes a fumble. It absolutely matters how many steps are taken. It's a matter of possession and I believe he had it.
September 12, 201016 yr Yes it does. If you catch the ball and take steps and go down then the ball pops out it's always ruled that the ground causes a fumble. It absolutely matters how many steps are taken. It's a matter of possession and I believe he had it. Incorrect.
September 12, 201016 yr Incorrect. When is it ok to drop the ball then? Please clarify. If he caught the ball, back peddled, had possession, then fell and dropped the ball, what's the ruling?
September 12, 201016 yr Wording of the actual rule vs the one we all wish was the rule: The rule in question states, "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete."
September 12, 201016 yr I'm trying to tell you that IMO he wasn't in the act of catching the pass at the point of falling to the ground. I think it was over before he had fallen to the ground. I'm not wishing the rule wasn't applied. I understand that rule.
September 12, 201016 yr I'm trying to tell you that IMO he wasn't in the act of catching the pass at the point of falling to the ground. I think it was over before he had fallen to the ground. I'm not wishing the rule wasn't applied. I understand that rule. The play was not over before he fell to the ground. It's not like he caught it, ran 3 steps untouched, and then suddenly his knee gave out. He caught it, hit, spun around and went to the ground where the ball popped out.
September 12, 201016 yr Ok I youtubed it. Seeing it once on CBS I thought it was a catch. After looking at it again, I retract my previous statements.
September 13, 201016 yr This is a bad rule. All a running back has to do is break the plane and the play is over. When Johnson fell to the turf with the ball, the play should have been over. To satisfy my curiosity, I'd like to know the evolution of this rule.
September 13, 201016 yr This is a bad rule. All a running back has to do is break the plane and the play is over. When Johnson fell to the turf with the ball, the play should have been over. To satisfy my curiosity, I'd like to know the evolution of this rule. I'm with you. I understand why they ruled the way they did, but that was a touchdown.
September 13, 201016 yr By rule I think they got it right. The rule is tough to embrace but as written he didn't maintain control IMO. No doubt IMO. You basically have to hand the ref the ball after the catch. I'm not a huge fan of the rule, but they got it correct.
September 13, 201016 yr The play was not over before he fell to the ground. It's not like he caught it, ran 3 steps untouched, and then suddenly his knee gave out. He caught it, hit, spun around and went to the ground where the ball popped out. He caught it with 2 hands. One foot down, now the ball is controlled in one hand. Now the other foot hits in bounds. Then his knee hits in bounds and then his butt. TD, play should be over. Terrible rule and call. They are ruining the game IMO. Lions got hosed, bottom line. I don't care how the rule is stated. It's wrong. No one would have thought anything was wrong if it would have been ruled a TD.
September 13, 201016 yr He caught it with 2 hands. One foot down, now the ball is controlled in one hand. Now the other foot hits in bounds. Then his knee hits in bounds and then his butt. TD, play should be over. Terrible rule and call. They are ruining the game IMO. Lions got hosed, bottom line. I don't care how the rule is stated. It's wrong. No one would have thought anything was wrong if it would have been ruled a TD. Let me make one correction. It may be a terrible rule but it was not a terrible call.
September 13, 201016 yr Have a friend in Detroit that said they rioted after the game last night. Burned couches, flipped cars, broke windows...etc. Said it wasn't on the news because no one noticed anything was out of place.
September 13, 201016 yr I finally saw the play and under the current rule that is clearly not a catch. He needs to come back up with that ball in his hands for it to be a catch. Here is an explanation from the expert: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Pereira-explains-big-call-in-Detroit-Lions-Chicago-Bears-game-091210
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.