What's new
By:

one of the bigger crocks of BS

I almost threw my remote across the room and cold-cocked my girl. If that rule was interpreted correctly, it's the stupidest ****ing rule in the league. Seriously. Complete ****ing ********.
 
What are you guys talking about? Care to fill in a non-NFL fan?
 
I'm copying this from another place I posted this at.
__________________________


Bears fan.

Don't have League Pass.

Only have NFL Red Zone.

Saw it live.

Got pissed off and changed the channel.

Checked ESPN Gamecast a few minutes later to see where the Bears were on the final drive to get in field goal position.

Said Lions had ball 3rd down on the forty.

Thought Gamecast had frozen (known to do for me).

Went back to NFL Red Zone.

Just missed showing of replay and announcers were saying call was overturned.

I still have no idea why it was called incomplete.
 
https://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=7064

POOL REPORT
REFEREE GENE STERATORE
Q. What is the rule used on the near Detroit touchdown at the end of the game?
A, The ruling is that in order for the catch to be completed he has got to maintain possession of the ball throughout the entire process of the catch.
Q, He was on his behind before he rolled over. If he stayed on his behind would it have been a touchdown?
A. No. We don’t play with the two feet or one knee or anything of that scenario. We’re talking now about the process of the catch. He’s catching the football, as he goes to the ground, he must maintain possession of the ball throughout the entire process. So as he continues to fall if he fell with two feet and his elbow hit the ground and came out it would be incomplete.
Q. It looked like he had the ball up in one hand while on his rear end, but there was continuation?
A. Well, the process was not finished until he finished that roll and the entire process of that catch.
Q. How long did it take to determine that?
A. We had the normal time as far as the video was concerned. We would not run it any longer.
Click to expand...
 
i dont understand how a human could call it that way - regardless of the rule.

the rule is designed for when the ball jostles free as the guy falls, not for when the ball gets dropped as the guy is getting up.

and people say NBA refs suck?
 
Ya when I saw this I was all WTF??? This is as good as the "tuck rule"

Also whatever happened to the ground can't cause a fumble, also if this happened anywhere but the endzone I might be able to see their point but in the past I seem to remember a catch and a butt hitting the ground (and then hip) and play over TD anything after didn't matter. Like the tight rope catches in the end zone, toes the line maintains possession while in bounds it counted even if the ground knocked it loose after falling out of bounds.
 
The dude caught the ball. That's not enough? He has to maintain control through the entire process? Didn't he though? Looks like he caught it with one hand and had it the entire time. I must be missing something...
 
Gameface said:
The dude caught the ball. That's not enough? He has to maintain control through the entire process? Didn't he though? Looks like he caught it with one hand and had it the entire time. I must be missing something...
Click to expand...

Looks like he did. He catches it, brings is down, has it in his right hand, then it hits the grass and come out.
I thought the ground couldn't cause a fumble.

I've been a Bears fan for a long time and I think the Kittens got a bad break there, but hey they have to be used to it by now.
 
Gameface said:
The dude caught the ball. That's not enough? He has to maintain control through the entire process? Didn't he though? Looks like he caught it with one hand and had it the entire time. I must be missing something...
Click to expand...

apparently if you go down on a catch, you have to have the ball in your hand when you get back up, or something like that.

what's an even bigger crock is that if you're running with the ball, once the ball crosses the end line into the endzone it's a touchdown, and it doesn't seem to matter where the player is or what happens to the ball immediately after it crosses

anyhow, here's a link with some interesting info:
https://lions.football-news-update.com/detroit-lions-loss-to-chicago-bears-calvin-johnsons-fault-not-referees/
 
The Bears got ****ed. Johnson didn't lose the ball as much as let it go. It's still not as bad as the tuck rule, though.
 
I guess I don't know about the NFL but on the playground that is an epic catch and touchdown to win the game.
 
NFL refs are the best in the world at refereeing their respective sport. Sadly, they got that call right. The blame to be had is on the rules, not the refs. They interpreted it exactly how it is written.

It should have been a catch and Detroit should have won that game. But, the rule sucks.

The sad thing is that the NFL hasn't even made a statement about correcting the rule, because I'm sure 99% of people that watch and love football would have called that a catch. It looked good to me in real-time and it looked good on the replay, until I understood how the rule was supposed to be enforced.
 
It is a rule that needs to be changed. There is a double standard. A running back can extend his arms on the goal line, and if a mere fraction of the ball crosses the plane, even if the defender knocks it away immediately; then it is a touchdown. Johnson makes a great catch, maintains control while going to the ground and both feet hit and he lands on his butt, and it is an incomplete pass.
 
I guess I'm the only one in the world that didnt think it was a catch.

To me his momentum carried him to the ground and the ball hits and comes loose. No catch.
 
Having played football as a receiver that was a ****ing god damn awesome catch!! The poster above me has no clue. Probably waxing his 360 control paddle when others were actually playing the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top