Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    That rule needs to change then.
    I guess, offenses have it way too tough in the NFL these days.

    (Original post by Motorbiker)
    I thought as soon as the knee hits the ground it's a dead ball and play over?

    (I am noob though. )

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    It's only dead if he has possession when his knee hits the ground. Possession for a receiver going to the ground is only established if they control the ball through the entire process of falling. So although he was down he still had to establish possession to kill the play. He failed to do so, and the pass was incomplete.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Motorbiker)
    Got the book Friday night lights is based on, same name, for Xmas. Anyone read it? Also got film to watch. Seen all of TV show...
    Yeah, got it for Christmas last year. Found it very interesting, more as a social critique than just about the football, although I found that well written as well. Need to watch the TV show at some point.

    Currently reading "Next Man Up", which was behind the scenes of the 2004 Ravens. It's pretty interesting to hear the stories behind a lot of the players, particularly the trials of those on the fringes of the roster.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Motorbiker)
    I thought as soon as the knee hits the ground it's a dead ball and play over?

    (I am noob though. )

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I also thought this was the rule. That's what made the call so marginal for me. If that's not the rule then he lost the ball whilst he was on the floor so Smash is right and it has to be an incomplete catch. Shame really, that would have been a heck of a climax. I really like to see games won on positive plays rather than lost on negative ones.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    BTW it's not the same as the Megatron play because Megatron had control but deliberately released the ball prematurely and was called on kind of a technicality. This play is exactly the kind of thing the rule is for, where Bryant didn't release the ball on purpose.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wattsy)
    I also thought this was the rule. That's what made the call so marginal for me. If that's not the rule then he lost the ball whilst he was on the floor so Smash is right and it has to be an incomplete catch. Shame really, that would have been a heck of a climax. I really like to see games won on positive plays rather than lost on negative ones.
    Yeah I agree with that. Kneeling always seems like an anticlimax too.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    And honestly I hope Rodgers gets healthy and the Packers beat the Seahawks, not because I don't like the Hawks but because the AFC teams have a way better chance to play a close game vs GB.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SmashConcept)
    BTW it's not the same as the Megatron play because Megatron had control but deliberately released the ball prematurely and was called on kind of a technicality. This play is exactly the kind of thing the rule is for, where Bryant didn't release the ball on purpose.
    He didn't release the ball at all. He still had it. I'm aware he didn't have complete control by the end but, in my opinion, the rule is a joke when that isn't deemed a complete catch.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheMagicRat)
    He didn't release the ball at all. He still had it. I'm aware he didn't have complete control by the end but, in my opinion, the rule is a joke when that isn't deemed a complete catch.
    He lost control of the ball after it hit the ground, then regained control shortly afterwards without it hitting the ground again. Doesn't matter, because after the ball hit the ground the play was over.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Reinbold has a good point here. If he's 2 yards further forward and steps into the TD plane it's all good and it's a TD regardless of if he drops it after breaking the plane and falling. He's in control when the plane is broken. Seems a bit of an oddity. I understand the call but after that I don't like the rule. He's taken three steps. The ground can't cause a fumble but it certainly caused an incomplete there.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SmashConcept)
    He lost control of the ball after it hit the ground, then regained control shortly afterwards without it hitting the ground again. Doesn't matter, because after the ball hit the ground the play was over.
    I'm not disputing the call. That was correct. I'm disputing the rule.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wattsy)
    Reinbold has a good point here. If he's 2 yards further forward and steps into the TD plane it's all good and it's a TD regardless of if he drops it after breaking the plane and falling. He's in control when the plane is broken. Seems a bit of an oddity. I understand the call but after that I don't like the rule. He's taken three steps. The ground can't cause a fumble but it certainly caused an incomplete there.
    I don't think that's the case. It would be like if you lay out to catch a pass in the back of the end zone, toe tap to stay in bounds, then drop the ball as you fall down. That would be ruled incomplete even though you caught the ball and had broken the plan when you got your feet down. Did he really take three steps? Maybe I have an inaccurate picture of the play in my head.

    The rule seems pretty consistent to me. Even though they have made it so defenders are not allowed to cover and are not allowed to hit, I think saying receivers don't have to catch the ball any more might be a step too far even for the current committee.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Here's the Vine:

    http://http://uk.complex.com/sports/2015/01/dez-bryant-cowboys-wr-gets-incredible-catch-reversed-by-referees?utm_campaign=complexmag %2Bsocialflow%2B01%2B2015&utm_so urce=twitter&utm_medium=social

    3rd time lucky!

    If it's not 3 steps there's certainly more than one. I think you head image might be a little bit off because you seem so certain that it's run of the mill. I really don't think it is run of the mill.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Not loading for me, but I'll have another look at it later. Honestly when I watched it on stream it just seemed uncontroversial so I didn't really pay attention, so I am happy to admit I could be wrong. It seems as though a lot of people online disagree with me. Honestly didn't find this game as compelling as the scoreline suggests, not sure why.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I think the call is right but the rule is crap.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Colts are doing suprisingly well, but the result seems inevitable: it's only a matter of time before Peyton begins making those long passes.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Andrew Luck is such a tank
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Denver got so lucky there. Indy to win still though
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Cribbs is an idiot. He got away with one in the first half. You're up by 11 - just take the fair catch!

    EDIT: Play reversed. Wow. Still an idiot though.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Overruled. I don't really know the rules on that but there seems to be some disagreement.

    Joy. That'll just add fuel to the "NFL IS RIGGED!!!!11111!!!!" fire.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not really a Luck fan except when he's playing Denver or Dallas but today I want him to stop making silly throws into double coverage and beat the Broncos!

    I also don't know that rule very well but I didn't like the call, I didn't think he got blocked into the returner, the blocker looks like he's trying to block him away from the returner and the gunner just squares him up and rings his bell.

    Rugby could teach some of these planks about tackling too. Wrap up and go around the waist!
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources

    Quick link:

    Unanswered sport threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.