Todd_is_God Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I never thought of it like that and yea he has a great point. He was later asked if he got any more information from the ref other than what he said on the mic. The ref didn't agree that Bryant going for the goal-line was a move "common to the game" which is why he ruled it incomplete. I don't know if there is a definitive list of moves "common to the game" or not, but it does seem to be very subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd_is_God Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 He has a point if the rule was different, hell he has a point if he went out of bounds but the rule is very clear, on catch if you go to ground you must secure the ball, not once was the ball secure until after the play. You see a few a game like this, where I think you would think he held the ball long enough before losing it I thought it was pretty secure until he hit the ground tbh, which is where Garrett's point comes in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antiochas III Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 That I don't know but maybe the fact he lost control without stretching his arm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antiochas III Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I thought it was pretty secure until he hit the ground tbh, which is where Garrett's point comes in. That's the thing. Watch this game at least once a player will make a catch get hit then drop it. It will be classed as an incomplete pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Should it be a catch according to common sense? Maybe. But it isn't for any other game or player in the league since the football move rule was brought in so f**k them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 What if you make a catch and just stand (or lie) still. Is the pass complete? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antiochas III Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Not until a D makes contact. If I'm not mistaken only the QB and go down to end a play with out D contact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd_is_God Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 That's the thing. Watch this game at least once a player will make a catch get hit then drop it. It will be classed as an incomplete pass. Likewise a player who takes three steps and gets hit, knocking the ball loose, will have it ruled a fumble. The only question here is is reaching for the goal-line considered a move "common to the game of football"? - if it is then the call is incorrect as Bryant established control of the ball, got both feet down (plus another step) then reached for the goal-line before the ball become loose. However, if reaching for the goal-line is not a move "common to the game of football" then the call was correct. I would be interested to know what moves constitute those "common to the game of football" and if the NFL have compiled a list, or whether it is a completely subjective decision by the referee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichtie23 Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 I think we can say that it will be discussed during the offseason and the "Dez Rule" will be introduced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd_is_God Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 What if you make a catch and just stand (or lie) still. Is the pass complete? Yeah, though the play would continue until you were tackled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd_is_God Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I think we can say that it will be discussed during the offseason and the "Dez Rule" will be introduced I don't think this should have anything to do with the existing rule. Its unusual in that so much time passes, and so much happens (steps, football moves etc), between the initial catch and Bryant hitting the ground that other factors could be considered. Its easy to consider these factors now, but given none of us considered the football move rule at the time, and the officials didnt speak to Garrett before the review, you wonder if the replay official / referee considered them when coming to their decision. The existing rule is fine for a diving catch or deciding whether its an incomplete pass or fumble when a receiver has the ball knocked out by a defender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Likewise a player who takes three steps and gets hit, knocking the ball loose, will have it ruled a fumble. The only question here is is reaching for the goal-line considered a move "common to the game of football"? - if it is then the call is incorrect as Bryant established control of the ball, got both feet down (plus another step) then reached for the goal-line before the ball become loose. However, if reaching for the goal-line is not a move "common to the game of football" then the call was correct. I would be interested to know what moves constitute those "common to the game of football" and if the NFL have compiled a list, or whether it is a completely subjective decision by the referee. The way I am reading it are the steps he took were not a "conscious" move but part of his landing. They were not a deliberate attempt to advance the ball down the field. It's nonsense though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd_is_God Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 The way I am reading it are the steps he took were not a "conscious" move but part of his landing. They were not a deliberate attempt to advance the ball down the field. It's nonsense though. The steps may not have been a deliberate attemp to advance the ball downfield, but the reaching of the arm towards the goal-line I think was. As i mentioned in my last post, however, i don't think the officials will have taken this into consideration at the time, instead focusing on a very simple "did the ball come loose or not?" question, which of course it did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Well the answer from the nfl appears to be whether a reach for the goal line is a football move or not is irrlevant as receiver was going to ground and he must maintain posession throughout that process. Presumably then if you land on two feet standing and lose the ball as you stretch for the line the ball is live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd_is_God Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Well the answer from the nfl appears to be whether a reach for the goal line is a football move or not is irrlevant as receiver was going to ground and he must maintain posession throughout that process. Presumably then if you land on two feet standing and lose the ball as you stretch for the line the ball is live. Yeah, just saw that myself. They maybe should look at that then as, by that definition, a player stretching then stumbling and falling across the goal-line from 10 yards out would have a TD nullified if the ball moved upon contact with the ground? Thats not right.Yeah it would be a live ball. Edit - would it have been a Touchdown had Bryant broken the plane of the goal-line, whilst in posession of the ball, before contacting the ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I think it would have been a TD the moment the plane was broken but who the hell knows!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Lanarkshire Jag Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I think it would have been a TD the moment the plane was broken but who the hell knows!!!! He'd have been short because he was down(through arm hitting field) at the 1 yard line if it was a completed pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 He'd have been short because he was down(through arm hitting field) at the 1 yard line if it was a completed pass. I know . However in theory if the play was run exactly the same but 5 yards further on I think they would have ruled TD even if he had subsequently lost the ball in the end zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jute Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Thought it was a shit rule until last night but as it denied the Cowgirls it is the best rule in NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvio Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Such as? I hope Fowler does....can't stand him Think he's a Californian guy, not sure. Brian Gay, John Rollins, Tommy Gainey and Jordan Spieth. Keegan Bradley was loving the Pats win on Saturday which disappointed me greatly, I've won a fortune on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.