|
|
It feels like they are trying to have it both ways. The problem with 15 yards in college is that defenders who get beat more than 15 yards downfield have an incentive to just commit a penalty. I'm guessing that's why they put that egregious clause in. They don't want huge penalties on minor, incidental contact but don't want intentional pass interference to be rewarded.
It's the same with the NBA's rules about clear path fouls on fast breaks. They tweaked it to prevent intentional fouling by defenders.
On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground.
If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch.
|
On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed.
The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays.
On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch.
Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it.
|
On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball.
|
On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. Which is where we get the problem of Touchdown passes when a receiver completes a catch in the end zone. If they were a runner the play would be dead as soon as they establish possession. but in receiving the play is held up untilthe receiver is tackeled in case we need to retroactively remove their possession of the ball.
And then you get Fail mary which was a joke.
|
Which i believe is part of the reason they are going back to the way it was.
|
Well, the problem this year was that Riveron was overturning too many calls during the regular season. If the ball moved a little when the receiver hit the ground but he needed multiple slo mo replay angles to see it, then he should just let the catch stand.
|
On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball.
That literally never happened. The Eagles play in the SB was the one time it did happen, and the TD was upheld. In all other cases the WR had tried to make a move before making the catch, essentially doing 2 things at once.
The same is true in baseball when you try to turn a double play. If you try to barehand the ball and throw the runner out at 1st, but drop the ball both runners are safe.
On March 22 2018 03:00 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. Which is where we get the problem of Touchdown passes when a receiver completes a catch in the end zone. If they were a runner the play would be dead as soon as they establish possession. but in receiving the play is held up untilthe receiver is tackeled in case we need to retroactively remove their possession of the ball. And then you get Fail mary which was a joke.
Except its not the same at all. No one argues that you need 2 feet down in the endzone to get the score, but a runner doesn't need to get 2 feet down in the endzone. Until you catch the ball, you haven't scored, and the definition of a catch doesn't change just because you are in the endzone. Otherwise you could just throw a super high ball and the guy could "catch it" but never get 2 feet down, or bounce the ball to a WR in the endzone. A catch requires possession and control. In all the controversial non-catches, the WR never had control, the ball hits the ground and moves around (proving his lack of control), and then the call of no call was made.
|
On March 22 2018 06:13 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. That literally never happened. The Eagles play in the SB was the one time it did happen, and the TD was upheld. In all other cases the WR had tried to make a move before making the catch, essentially doing 2 things at once. The same is true in baseball when you try to turn a double play. If you try to barehand the ball and throw the runner out at 1st, but drop the ball both runners are safe. Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 03:00 Sermokala wrote:On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. Which is where we get the problem of Touchdown passes when a receiver completes a catch in the end zone. If they were a runner the play would be dead as soon as they establish possession. but in receiving the play is held up untilthe receiver is tackeled in case we need to retroactively remove their possession of the ball. And then you get Fail mary which was a joke. Except its not the same at all. No one argues that you need 2 feet down in the endzone to get the score, but a runner doesn't need to get 2 feet down in the endzone. Until you catch the ball, you haven't scored, and the definition of a catch doesn't change just because you are in the endzone. Otherwise you could just throw a super high ball and the guy could "catch it" but never get 2 feet down, or bounce the ball to a WR in the endzone. A catch requires possession and control. In all the controversial non-catches, the WR never had control, the ball hits the ground and moves around (proving his lack of control), and then the call of no call was made.
I disagree, I think James controlled the ball then reached for the touchdown and I think dez controlled the ball before he came to the ground I'm glad the NFL now agree's. Great you liked the way the rule was, you are in the minority big time.
|
51132 Posts
When asked if his knee was close to 100 percent and if he would be ready to participate in offseason drills, Bridgewater dodged the query.
"That's not something I'm comfortable talking about right now," he said, per ESPN. "I'm pretty sure that will be a discussion I have with the training staff and we'll come up with a plan moving forward."
that's not a good sign.
|
On March 22 2018 07:14 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 06:13 cLutZ wrote:On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. That literally never happened. The Eagles play in the SB was the one time it did happen, and the TD was upheld. In all other cases the WR had tried to make a move before making the catch, essentially doing 2 things at once. The same is true in baseball when you try to turn a double play. If you try to barehand the ball and throw the runner out at 1st, but drop the ball both runners are safe. On March 22 2018 03:00 Sermokala wrote:On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. Which is where we get the problem of Touchdown passes when a receiver completes a catch in the end zone. If they were a runner the play would be dead as soon as they establish possession. but in receiving the play is held up untilthe receiver is tackeled in case we need to retroactively remove their possession of the ball. And then you get Fail mary which was a joke. Except its not the same at all. No one argues that you need 2 feet down in the endzone to get the score, but a runner doesn't need to get 2 feet down in the endzone. Until you catch the ball, you haven't scored, and the definition of a catch doesn't change just because you are in the endzone. Otherwise you could just throw a super high ball and the guy could "catch it" but never get 2 feet down, or bounce the ball to a WR in the endzone. A catch requires possession and control. In all the controversial non-catches, the WR never had control, the ball hits the ground and moves around (proving his lack of control), and then the call of no call was made. I disagree, I think James controlled the ball then reached for the touchdown and I think dez controlled the ball before he came to the ground I'm glad the NFL now agree's. Great you liked the way the rule was, you are in the minority big time. The rule before was clear. Whatever the new rule is, I don't see how it will be as clear
|
On March 22 2018 10:36 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 07:14 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 06:13 cLutZ wrote:On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. That literally never happened. The Eagles play in the SB was the one time it did happen, and the TD was upheld. In all other cases the WR had tried to make a move before making the catch, essentially doing 2 things at once. The same is true in baseball when you try to turn a double play. If you try to barehand the ball and throw the runner out at 1st, but drop the ball both runners are safe. On March 22 2018 03:00 Sermokala wrote:On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. Which is where we get the problem of Touchdown passes when a receiver completes a catch in the end zone. If they were a runner the play would be dead as soon as they establish possession. but in receiving the play is held up untilthe receiver is tackeled in case we need to retroactively remove their possession of the ball. And then you get Fail mary which was a joke. Except its not the same at all. No one argues that you need 2 feet down in the endzone to get the score, but a runner doesn't need to get 2 feet down in the endzone. Until you catch the ball, you haven't scored, and the definition of a catch doesn't change just because you are in the endzone. Otherwise you could just throw a super high ball and the guy could "catch it" but never get 2 feet down, or bounce the ball to a WR in the endzone. A catch requires possession and control. In all the controversial non-catches, the WR never had control, the ball hits the ground and moves around (proving his lack of control), and then the call of no call was made. I disagree, I think James controlled the ball then reached for the touchdown and I think dez controlled the ball before he came to the ground I'm glad the NFL now agree's. Great you liked the way the rule was, you are in the minority big time. The rule before was clear. Whatever the new rule is, I don't see how it will be as clear
Most people disagree with you. But it is interesting to hear of someone with the other perspective.
|
On March 22 2018 06:13 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. That literally never happened. The Eagles play in the SB was the one time it did happen, and the TD was upheld. In all other cases the WR had tried to make a move before making the catch, essentially doing 2 things at once. The same is true in baseball when you try to turn a double play. If you try to barehand the ball and throw the runner out at 1st, but drop the ball both runners are safe. Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 03:00 Sermokala wrote:On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. Which is where we get the problem of Touchdown passes when a receiver completes a catch in the end zone. If they were a runner the play would be dead as soon as they establish possession. but in receiving the play is held up untilthe receiver is tackeled in case we need to retroactively remove their possession of the ball. And then you get Fail mary which was a joke. Except its not the same at all. No one argues that you need 2 feet down in the endzone to get the score, but a runner doesn't need to get 2 feet down in the endzone. Until you catch the ball, you haven't scored, and the definition of a catch doesn't change just because you are in the endzone. Otherwise you could just throw a super high ball and the guy could "catch it" but never get 2 feet down, or bounce the ball to a WR in the endzone. A catch requires possession and control. In all the controversial non-catches, the WR never had control, the ball hits the ground and moves around (proving his lack of control), and then the call of no call was made. In the fail mary the corner had control over the ball and two feet down but wasn't given an interception because the catch isn't a catch until the play is over and nothing retroactive can make it not a catch. A runner can run and stretch out his hand and have the ball hit the ground but as long as he has his hand on the ball and the ball crosses the goal line then its a TD. A WR needs to have control over the ball two feet in and then keep control of that ball until after he hits the ground.
Its the control over the ball part people disagree with. If a player has two feet in and control of the ball in the end zone the play should end with him getting a catch in the endzone for a touchback or a TD. This is not the case with the current rule.
|
51132 Posts
|
On March 22 2018 13:55 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 06:13 cLutZ wrote:On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. That literally never happened. The Eagles play in the SB was the one time it did happen, and the TD was upheld. In all other cases the WR had tried to make a move before making the catch, essentially doing 2 things at once. The same is true in baseball when you try to turn a double play. If you try to barehand the ball and throw the runner out at 1st, but drop the ball both runners are safe. On March 22 2018 03:00 Sermokala wrote:On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. Which is where we get the problem of Touchdown passes when a receiver completes a catch in the end zone. If they were a runner the play would be dead as soon as they establish possession. but in receiving the play is held up untilthe receiver is tackeled in case we need to retroactively remove their possession of the ball. And then you get Fail mary which was a joke. Except its not the same at all. No one argues that you need 2 feet down in the endzone to get the score, but a runner doesn't need to get 2 feet down in the endzone. Until you catch the ball, you haven't scored, and the definition of a catch doesn't change just because you are in the endzone. Otherwise you could just throw a super high ball and the guy could "catch it" but never get 2 feet down, or bounce the ball to a WR in the endzone. A catch requires possession and control. In all the controversial non-catches, the WR never had control, the ball hits the ground and moves around (proving his lack of control), and then the call of no call was made. In the fail mary the corner had control over the ball and two feet down but wasn't given an interception because the catch isn't a catch until the play is over and nothing retroactive can make it not a catch. A runner can run and stretch out his hand and have the ball hit the ground but as long as he has his hand on the ball and the ball crosses the goal line then its a TD. A WR needs to have control over the ball two feet in and then keep control of that ball until after he hits the ground. Its the control over the ball part people disagree with. If a player has two feet in and control of the ball in the end zone the play should end with him getting a catch in the endzone for a touchback or a TD. This is not the case with the current rule.
The thing about the "going to the ground" rule, is its just a rule about proof of control. A WR might say he has control and 2 feet down, but its not really established control if you can't keep your hands on it after getting lit up, or hitting the ground. That is why those plays aren't fumbles at the 30 yard line, because the WR never actually caught it. It just kinda sorta looked like he caught it for 10 frames of replay.
|
On March 22 2018 13:55 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2018 06:13 cLutZ wrote:On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. That literally never happened. The Eagles play in the SB was the one time it did happen, and the TD was upheld. In all other cases the WR had tried to make a move before making the catch, essentially doing 2 things at once. The same is true in baseball when you try to turn a double play. If you try to barehand the ball and throw the runner out at 1st, but drop the ball both runners are safe. On March 22 2018 03:00 Sermokala wrote:On March 22 2018 01:30 JimmiC wrote:On March 22 2018 01:14 cLutZ wrote:On March 21 2018 21:18 JimmiC wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. It still cant touch the ground , it is slight movement they changed. The ball touched the ground in both the Dez Bryant and Jesse James plays. On March 22 2018 00:08 andrewlt wrote:On March 21 2018 10:51 cLutZ wrote: I still don't know whats wrong about forcing WRs to stop the ball from hitting the ground. If Riveron needs 10 minutes of watching slo mo replays to figure that out, it should be a catch. Its never taken me more than 2 views to get the right call in any of these cases. Its only the wishy washy people who want these non-catches to be catches that complicate things. And they are going to write a rule that is super confusing or will let WRs trap the ball on the ground to catch it. But they were a runner at that point because they had already completed the catch and controlled the ball. Which is where we get the problem of Touchdown passes when a receiver completes a catch in the end zone. If they were a runner the play would be dead as soon as they establish possession. but in receiving the play is held up untilthe receiver is tackeled in case we need to retroactively remove their possession of the ball. And then you get Fail mary which was a joke. Except its not the same at all. No one argues that you need 2 feet down in the endzone to get the score, but a runner doesn't need to get 2 feet down in the endzone. Until you catch the ball, you haven't scored, and the definition of a catch doesn't change just because you are in the endzone. Otherwise you could just throw a super high ball and the guy could "catch it" but never get 2 feet down, or bounce the ball to a WR in the endzone. A catch requires possession and control. In all the controversial non-catches, the WR never had control, the ball hits the ground and moves around (proving his lack of control), and then the call of no call was made. In the fail mary the corner had control over the ball and two feet down but wasn't given an interception because the catch isn't a catch until the play is over and nothing retroactive can make it not a catch. A runner can run and stretch out his hand and have the ball hit the ground but as long as he has his hand on the ball and the ball crosses the goal line then its a TD. A WR needs to have control over the ball two feet in and then keep control of that ball until after he hits the ground. Its the control over the ball part people disagree with. If a player has two feet in and control of the ball in the end zone the play should end with him getting a catch in the endzone for a touchback or a TD. This is not the case with the current rule. There is nothing special about the endzone. A player needed control and to be in bounds to make a catch regardless of where he was on the field. Hence the Jesse James situation; he didn't have control. The problem comes from defining "control of the ball". Ideally, we would have a definition that minimised subjectivity and was easy enough for refs on the field to determine most of the time. Hence the previous definition that they either have to take some steps to become a runner or keep control as they land.
The players knew the rule. Jesse James could have scored a TD if he played better: kept one hand under the ball (so it didn't hit the ground) and not let the ball slip out. He didn't even need to reach forward as much as he did.
|
United States97247 Posts
|
They're going to eventually define catch like the SCOTUS defines porn, "I know it when I see it."
|
Anyone notice that the Jets have singed the top QB WR and RB from the 2016 1-15 Browns. Go Jets!....
|
Allen Hurns is signing with the Cowboys no word on contract. Also, this could mean the Cowboys cut Dez and he is their number 1 or that he competes with Williams to be the #2. If the Cowboys are going for it they are better with option 1, but Dez is way over paid for his production so we will see.
edit:reported 2 years 12 mil
|
A Texas grand jury indicted Philadelphia Eagles defensive lineman Michael Bennett on Friday for injuring a 66-year-old paraplegic security staffer at the 2017 Super Bowl in Houston, according to a press release from the Harris County District Attorney's Office.
Bennett has been charged with injury to the elderly, a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine, according to the release.
"As a result of the indictment, a warrant has been issued for Bennett’s arrest," the district attorney's office said in the release. "Prosecutors are working with Bennett’s counsel regarding his surrender."
According to the district attorney's office, Bennett was at Super Bowl LI as a spectator to watch his brother, tight end Martellus Bennett, play for the New England Patriots against the Atlanta Falcons. While attempting to get onto the field after the game to celebrate with his brother, Michael Bennett shoved a 66-year-old disabled security staffer who had asked him to use a different entrance for field access, according to the release.
Michael Bennett indicted for injuring elderly paraplegic at Super Bowl LI
|
|
|
|