Thank God for the Lions

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 6:56 pm

The Lions might be the only thing that keeps the Bears from being the worst team in the NFL. Julius Peppers has knocked Stafford out of the game and helped Chicago pull within 1 point before halftime. The Bears may still not win and, should that happen, they will seal their fate as truly being the worst in the league. Gonna be a long fucking year for Bear fans.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 8:34 pm

KC Scott wrote:The Lions got screwed on that catch by Johnson like I have never been seen before.

Holy shit what is happening when that isn't considered a catch?

Absolutely agree.....FUCKED UP call.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 8:40 pm

Paul wrote:Absolutely agree.....FUCKED UP call.

Here's a thought. Maybe Johnson could hang onto the ball next time. Read a fucking rulebook sometime.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 9:07 pm

KC Scott wrote:LOL - you see the play Bri? He caught, had control, his body and hand both touch in the end zone then he puts the ball on the ground. I don't give a fuck how anyone interprets the rule book - that's a TD and the replay offcial blew it. Expect something official from the league saying same

I saw the play. I had the Bears-Lions game playing on my laptop while the Steelers were on the big screen. The rule says you have to control the ball through the whole catch. All he had to do was get up with the ball still in his hands and it would have been a TD. He didn't so it wasn't. Thank Bert Emanuel for that.

Screw_Michigan · Post by **Screw_Michigan** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 9:18 pm

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-high ... ron-non-TD

THAT is a fucking TD. Any claim to the contrary is completely ludicrous.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 9:26 pm

KC Scott wrote: He caught, had control, his body and hand both touch in the end zone then he puts the ball on the ground.

Haven't even seen the vid (since it won't load) -- but do we have to revisit this same complete fucking ignorance every fucking season?

You just described a textbook example of an incomplete pass, per longtime NFL rules.

The receiver must maintain control until he comes to a stop on the ground. Period. Don't matter if he "broke the plane" or not.

But every year, someone gets on a soapbox and says "I have no idea what the rules say" -- it's getting pretty funny.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 9:29 pm

Screw_Michigan wrote:http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-high ... ron-non-TD

THAT is a fucking TD. Any claim to the contrary is completely ludicrous.

Sorry, this isn't college football where apparently you do not even have to carry the ball in the end zone any more. This is the NFL where a receiver has to demonstrate control of the football throughout the full act of catching the ball.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 9:34 pm

What dins said.

If the ball comes loose when it hits the ground, it's incomplete. He could have made the catch by (as Bri said) simply tucking the ball in, which he could have done had he not had the ball in one hand. Like it, or not, the officials got it right....by the rules of the game. Sucks for the Lions but it is what it is.

R-Jack · Post by **R-Jack** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 9:44 pm

It wasn't a TD in week one last year. Why would it be now?

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:04 pm

I just finished watching the game on TiVo...I can't believe that call. How much more do you have to do for a catch to count? Two feet down with clear possession and he only loses the ball AFTER he falls down.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:10 pm

Shoalzie wrote:I just finished watching the game on TiVo...I can't believe that call. How much more do you have to do for a catch to count? Two feet down with clear possession and he only loses the ball AFTER he falls down.

That's the way the rule has been since 2000. Any time you go to the ground, you have to maintain absolute control of the ball through the ENTIRE catch. He had the ball palmed and could have very easily come up with the ball. Why he didn't is beyond me.

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:19 pm

It stings like hell because they looked outmatched but hung in the game and damn well could've had a thrilling game-winning score off an example of tremendous physical ability. That's the type of stuff CJ is capable of...vise grip hands on the end of long arms attached to a 6-5 frame. The Bears stink...they wanted badly to give that game to the Lions with the numerous turnovers and they damn near cost themselves the game with the foolish 4th down call from the 1, where they couldn't get a single yard following a Hill fumble deep in Lions territory. The Lions are at least a year away from making a step forward but they competed today...I give them that. Stafford's injury isn't season ending so maybe they lose him for a week or two. I really hope he doesn't miss too much time because he needs to continue to gain experience.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:24 pm

KC Scott wrote: here's the NFL Definition of Possession When a player controls the ball throughout the act of clearly touching both feet, or any other part of his body other than his hand(s), to the ground inbounds.

On that Play He has posession with both hands, ball in control, both feet down before he starts the fall

No he didn't. He was off balance and falling all the way.

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:38 pm

Receivers definitely know how much possession they need to get a catch when straddling the sidelines. Calvin thought he did enough in having complete control of the ball as he lands with both feet down and in the process of falling down, he braces his fall with the ball in a single hand causing it to come loose.

Question, if he braces his fall with both hands on the ball and hangs on, do they overrule it? Is he essentially being punished for falling down with one hand on the ball instead of two? Can the ball touch the ground within a receiver's hands while possession has been established or is it like "hot lava" and the ball can't touch the ground at all?

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:44 pm

Shoalzie wrote:Question, if he braces his fall with both hands on the ball and hangs on, do they overrule it? Is he essentially being punished for falling down with one hand on the ball instead of two? Can the ball touch the ground within a receiver's hands while possession has been established or is it like "hot lava" and the ball can't touch the ground at all?

The problem wasn't the ball touching the ground. The problem was his hand coming off the ball when the ball touched. That was what made it incomplete, not the ball touching.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:49 pm

KC Scott wrote:The call should have been posession ball in control and both feet down

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-high ... dlines2col

here's the NFL Definition of Possession When a player controls the ball throughout the act of clearly touching both feet, or any other part of his body other than his hand(s), to the ground inbounds.

On that Play He has posession with both hands, ball in control, both feet down before he starts the fall

Yes, that defines "possession" but it does not define "a catch".

Okay, I'll try to simplify it for you. If a receiver in the endzone has both feet planted inbounds on the sideline, lays out to catch the ball, catches the ball with both hands, and then the ball comes out when his body hits the ground. Is that a catch? No. Same scenario with what happened today, only in a very unusual way that most of us have never seen before.
Btw, the "rulebook" you pulled up from NFL.com is virtually a "Rules for Dummies" version. The announcers very clearly explained "the process" regarding what constitutes a catch. Guess you missed that.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:49 pm

Sure looked like a good catch to me, he basically let go of the ball purposely once he thought it was a TD. From the replay I saw, the side judge raised his arms indicating such but must've been over-ruled.

Lion fan has good right to be pissed.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:50 pm

KC Scott wrote:No he doesn't.

He braces as he's falling with his free hand that's down and what makes contact then he rolls, with ball still in hand and puts it on the turf

And then he lifts his hand and the ball stays on the ground as he is still rolling. No catch. Thanks for playing.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:53 pm

BSmack wrote:This is the NFL where a receiver has to demonstrate control of the football throughout the full act of catching the ball.

He did quite clearly. It was a blown call. What is so difficult to get about that?

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 11:00 pm

mvscal wrote:
BSmack wrote:This is the NFL where a receiver has to demonstrate control of the football throughout the full act of catching the ball.
He did quite clearly.

You're wrong. His hand coming off the ball should have told you that.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 11:11 pm

KC Scott wrote:
Mace wrote: If a receiver in the endzone has both feet planted inbounds on the sideline, lays out to catch the ball, catches the ball with both hands, and then the ball comes out when his body hits the ground. Is that a catch? No
That's not what happened. He had possession when his body hit the ground in the end zone. No juggling.

The announcers very clearly explained "the process" regarding what constitutes a catch. Guess you missed that.
Announcers are idiots. Tell me you knew.

You find the process rule and link it up or write it out -

I didn't mention anything about "juggling" because he didn't juggle the ball. I tried to give you a comparative scenario and it apparently went over your head. You didn't see the part where they asked the former head of NFL officials to explain the rule? Yes, announcers are idiots....which is why they thought it was a catch until the rule was explained to them. Why don't you find the process rule and read it for yourself. I haven't read it...but I did listen to the explanation of the rule by someone who actually knows the rules.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 11:19 pm

Rule 8, Section 1, Article 4.

A play from start to finish is a process. When you go to the ground, even after you've caught the ball, you have to maintain possession.

The rule 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.

So the play stood as called and the Bears held on to win, 19-14.

The onus is on the receiver to hold onto the ball even after he hits the ground.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Pere ... ?gt1=39002

Correct call = Bears win = I may not be able to say that again this season

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:14 am

BSmack wrote:
mvscal wrote:
BSmack wrote:This is the NFL where a receiver has to demonstrate control of the football throughout the full act of catching the ball.
He did quite clearly.
You're wrong. His hand coming off the ball should have told you that.

He was already on the ground before it came loose.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:17 am

mvscal wrote:He was already on the ground before it came loose.

Did the whistle blow? Think long and hard.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:22 am

There is no tortured, overlawyered reading of rules that is going to convince me or anyone else who can fire three brain cells at a time that that is anything other than a completed pass for a touchdown, so save the bullshit for somebody who gives a fuck.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:27 am

mvscal wrote:There is no tortured, overlawyered reading of rules that is going to convince me or anyone else who can fire three brain cells at a time that that is anything other than a completed pass for a touchdown, so save the bullshit for somebody who gives a fuck.

You've been provided with the rule, an explanation of the rule by an NFL official, and a link that includes the video of the play and you are still too stubborn and/or stupid to admit that you're wrong? That will come as a surprise to absolutely no one. Face the fact, dumbfuck, that you have very little understanding of football rules....among a host of other things.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:39 am

Mace wrote:You've been provided with the rule, an explanation of the rule by an NFL official, and a link that includes the video of the play

And the video clearly shows a completed forward pass for a touchdown. Ass covering and excuse making isn't going to change the fact.

Go Coogs' · Post by **Go Coogs'** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:40 am

It was a catch in my mind. The ruling in the endzone kind of creates a grey area with the interpretation of a "football move". The ruling was correct, but in the endzone, the ruling should probably be more liberal.

However, inside two minutes every player must leave nothing to question when involved in a play; especially a completed pass. It's out of the coaches and players hands for review. It's up to the booth at that point and Megatron should've known better. Hold onto the fucking ball with both hands and the refs won't get involved. In the end, its Megatron's fault for using the ball to prop himself up after he caught it.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:44 am

Go Coogs' wrote:It was a catch in my mind.

C'mon, who are you going to believe? Your lying eyes or a bunch of refs trying to cover their own asses over an obviously blown call?

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:51 am

mvscal wrote:There is no tortured, overlawyered reading of rules that is going to convince me.

Of course not. You've never admitted you are wrong about anything. That's why we clash so often. The difference this time is that I know the relevant rule and you do not. I would have like nothing better than to have given Cutler and the Bears another opportunity to score me some FF points. But even as the play happened I knew there was no way in hell that was a catch.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:52 am

mvscal wrote:
Mace wrote:You've been provided with the rule, an explanation of the rule by an NFL official, and a link that includes the video of the play
And the video clearly shows a completed forward pass for a touchdown. Ass covering and excuse making isn't going to change the fact.

Correctly applying the rule as written is not "excuse making" or "ass covering". "Excuse making" and "ass covering" is what idiots like you are doing when they don't have a clue about the rules of the game and can't apply the rule to what they've seen on the field. Way to play the role of a douchebag fan, twatlips.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 1:53 am

That's really great stuff except for the fact that they didn't correctly apply the rule. The player did in fact maintain control all the way to the ground. Once his ass hit the ground he was down. So where was the ball when his ass hit the ground? Was it moving around or loose? No? Well, that's a completed pass. This "process" you tards keep talking about ends when the player is down.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 1:58 am

BSmack wrote:
mvscal wrote:He was already on the ground before it came loose.
Did the whistle blow? Think long and hard.

Who gives a fuck? The play was reviewed. The only thing that matters is identifying the moment the player was down and locating the ball at that moment. Pretty simple stuff and they blew it.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:06 am

mvscal wrote:That's really great stuff except for the fact that they didn't correctly apply the rule. The player did in fact maintain control all the way to the ground. Once his ass hit the ground he was down. So where was the ball when his ass hit the ground? Was it moving around or loose? No? Well, that's a completed pass. This "process" you tards keep talking about ends when the player is down.

Once again, you're too stupid and stubborn to understand the rule and admit that you're wrong. The receiver has to maintain possession until the play is completely over and it doesn't matter that his butt hit the ground because that does not cause the play to become dead. They got it right, whether you agree or not. End of fucking story.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:13 am

Yes, the play is "completely over" when the player is down with possession of the football. The ball was dead when it touched the ground.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:25 am

mvscal wrote:Yes, the play is "completely over" when the player is down with possession of the football. The ball was dead when it touched the ground.

You can argue against the logic of the rule. But the rule itself is crystal clear. No catch.

Joe in PB · Post by **Joe in PB** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:29 am

Shame on any player who doesn't finish, and lets a play be decided by the officials. All he had to do was cradle the ball into his body and roll, instead he got lazy and decided he'd use the ball to keep from hitting ground, and it rolled out. A rookie mistake from a 3rd year player, always make the call for the officials easy, especially if you're the Lions. :wink:

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:34 am

Joe in PB wrote:Shame on any player who doesn't finish, and lets a play be decided by the officials. All he had to do was cradle the ball into his body and roll, instead he got lazy and decided he'd use the ball to keep from hitting ground, and it rolled out. A rookie mistake from a 3rd year player, always make the call for the officials easy, especially if you're the Lions. :wink:

Exactly. And you're right, Butkus did not wear an earring. :)

Go Coogs' · Post by **Go Coogs'** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:34 am

Joe in PB wrote:Shame on any player who doesn't finish, and lets a play be decided by the officials. All he had to do was cradle the ball into his body and roll, instead he got lazy and decided he'd use the ball to keep from hitting ground, and it rolled out. A rookie mistake from a 3rd year player, always make the call for the officials easy, especially if you're the Lions. :wink:

Did you read the thread? Give credit where credit is due.

Joe in PB · Post by **Joe in PB** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:37 am

And you're right, Butkus did not wear an earring.

I was on a business trip in Chicago a few years back and I saw that on a T-shirt. Thought it was great. :D