T1B

Dins,

Go ahead and start working on your response to HyperboleHeadInTheSandDude. Here's the question:

So when a receiver catches the ball while running and spikes it before he comes to a complete stop, is that not a touchdown?

or...

So when a receiver catches the ball diving and pops up to his feet without coming to a complete stop and then hands the ball to the ref, is that not a touchdown?

or...

That's not in the rule book.

mvscal wrote:It's a dead ball.

As are all balls after they are incomplete.

BSmack wrote:So explain the ball rolling around on the ground.

How about you explain precisely at what point the play is over. The rule is lengthy, but still too vague. It doesn't discuss starting and ending points. The key part of the rule is this:

he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground,

Fact: He touched the ground with two feet, then he touched the ground with his ass, all while maintaining possession. The rule doesn't explain that anything needs to happen beyond that point, or for how long.

The rule reads like it has more to do with a player who is in the act of juggling the ball, or is trying to regain possession of it, but that was not the case here. CJ had control the entire way.

MGO, et al...

I'll assume you own a TV.

At several points over the last several years on my TV, after this same BS whinefest every fucking season, they interview someone from the rules office to clarify the reception "process" rules.

I've seen it explained more than once. The zebras are well-trained on it.


I really don't know how to explain it any more -- but then again, it appears I'm dealing with a whole buncha people who honestly believe they're much more well-versed in the NFL rules than the NFL refs are...

so I don't even know how to adress such ignorance/arrogance.


Second-guessing the coach/QB makes for awesome weekday football talk... second-guessing the refs after they make the correct call makes for awesome weekday football talk -- so long as you're not on the dumbshit side of the aisle.

We don't need anecdotes of a zebra's explanation when the rule is copied and pasted verbatim in this very thread.

Dinsdale wrote:MGO, et al...

I'll assume you own a TV.

At several points over the last several years on my TV, after this same BS whinefest every fucking season, they interview someone from the rules office to clarify the reception "process" rules.

I've seen it explained more than once. The zebras are well-trained on it.


I really don't know how to explain it any more -- but then again, it appears I'm dealing with a whole buncha people who honestly believe they're much more well-versed in the NFL rules than the NFL refs are...

so I don't even know how to adress such ignorance/arrogance.


Second-guessing the coach/QB makes for awesome weekday football talk... second-guessing the refs after they make the correct call makes for awesome weekday football talk -- so long as you're not on the dumbshit side of the aisle.

In the video replay the sidejudge closest to the play ruled it a TD. Not making this up.. watch his two arms extend upward to the sky.. It took a booth review to overturn it.. a booth review under two minutes is by it's very nature a "second guessing" by the same zebras who made the "wrong" call at the beginning. So while it's great that we can all cut and paste the rules about what a catch is, try not to forget that even the sidejudge thought it was a TD.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:We don't need anecdotes of a zebra's explanation when the rule is copied and pasted verbatim in this very thread.

Apparently you do.

Sin,
The Scoreboard

jiminphilly wrote:In the video replay the sidejudge closest to the play ruled it a TD. Not making this up.. watch his two arms extend upward to the sky.. It took a booth review to overturn it.. a booth review under two minutes is by it's very nature a "second guessing" by the same zebras who made the "wrong" call at the beginning. So while it's great that we can all cut and paste the rules about what a catch is, try not to forget that even the sidejudge thought it was a TD.

The side judge was overruled on the field. Which means the call was correct on the field and was not overturned.

Just because they're "well trained" doesn't mean they're incapable of mistakes. S_M is well trained in lapping up jizzshots; doesn't mean he won't miss a load now and then.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Just because they're "well trained" doesn't mean they're incapable of mistakes. S_M is well trained in lapping up jizzshots; doesn't mean he won't miss a load now and then.

They certainly are not incapable of mistakes, by any means.

But in this case, they didn't make one.

BSmack wrote:So explain the ball rolling around on the ground.

He knew he made the catch, and he landed on both feet and a hip inbounds...when he came to a stop he let go of the ball. Touchdown Lions. Case Closed. Let me know if you need me to spell it out for you in big bold letters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSYDYI4F4xs


He used the fucking ball to brace himself when he landed.


Ain't a catch... not today, not last week, not tomorrow.


What the fuck play are you idiots even watching... cause it sure the fuck must not be the Johnson non-catch in the Lions/Bears game.

The ball touched the ground as he went to the ground to make a catch. Done. Fine'. Play over. Not up for debate, and it never was.


Doesn't even vaguely resemble a TD catch.


And what seems lost on you douchebags, is that Johnson's hand touched out of bounds before his ass, knee, or anything else touches the ground.

There's multiple reasons that's not a catch.

Paul wrote:Case Closed.

Indeed, it is.

Let me know if you need me to spell it out for you in big bold letters.

No, but I'll do it for you.

Incomplete pass.

Bears Win!

:)

Paul wrote:Let me know if you need me to spell it out for you in big bold letters.

I think I can handle this.

YOU'RE A FAT FUCKING RETARD

Dinsdale wrote:He used the fucking ball to brace himself when he landed

Absolutely false. He used the ball to brace himself AFTER he landed when the play was dead.

Screw_Michigan wrote:

Dinsdale wrote:He used the fucking ball to brace himself when he landed

Absolutely false. He used the ball to brace himself AFTER he landed when the play was dead.

Absolutely false -- the play most certainly was NOT "dead," per NFL rules.

I'm not sure where any of you got this horribly mistaken idea of what constitutes a "catch."

They made the clarification of this rule very public at least 10 years ago, and again -- it's been applied EXTREMELY CONSISTANTLY since then.


Damn -- some of y'all need to start acting like you've actually watched a football game before last weekend.

The ball touched the ground in the process of the player going to the ground during the course of a catch... I'm not sure which part of that long-standing rule anyone who isn't attending their first rodeo doesn't get?

BSmack wrote:

jiminphilly wrote:In the video replay the sidejudge closest to the play ruled it a TD. Not making this up.. watch his two arms extend upward to the sky.. It took a booth review to overturn it.. a booth review under two minutes is by it's very nature a "second guessing" by the same zebras who made the "wrong" call at the beginning. So while it's great that we can all cut and paste the rules about what a catch is, try not to forget that even the sidejudge thought it was a TD.

The side judge was overruled on the field. Which means the call was correct on the field and was not overturned.

My bad. You are correct.
Question- if this is such a clear no-catch as some of you want to make it out to be, why did the SJ - who had a VERY clear view of the entire (non) catch, rule a TD? Could it because he too was confused?

jiminphilly wrote:My bad. You are correct.
Question- if this is such a clear no-catch as some of you want to make it out to be, why did the SJ - who had a VERY clear view of the entire (non) catch, rule a TD? Could it because he too was confused?

Because officials aren't perfect. That's why you have had refs screwing up the coin toss, giving teams extra downs and ruling balls that were clearly fumbles to be dead balls. That is also why an official with a better vantage point is allowed to overrule a call. Which is what happened in this case. Why he missed the call initially? I haven't the foggiest clue. I knew it was an incomplete pass when I watched it in real time on my laptop.

jiminphilly wrote:why did the SJ - who had a VERY clear view of the entire (non) catch, rule a TD? Could it because he too was confused?

Mere speculation on my part, but if you watch it, the SJ's angle of view gets pretty funky as the end of the play unfolds.

Again, mere speculation, and it's no more or less valid than your "confusion" theory.

Dinsdale wrote:And what seems lost on you douchebags, is that Johnson's hand touched out of bounds before his ass, knee, or anything else touches the ground.

Stop lying. Go to 0:58 into this video, and then watch it frame by frame. His hip hit inside the end zone first, then his hand (which also hit in bounds).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q4tKnfaIY

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Dinsdale wrote:And what seems lost on you douchebags, is that Johnson's hand touched out of bounds before his ass, knee, or anything else touches the ground.

Stop lying. Go to 0:58 into this video, and then watch it frame by frame. His hip hit inside the end zone first, then his hand (which also hit in bounds).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q4tKnfaIY

Here you go.



Its not definitive in low def. But its damn close.

Can't see his left hand.

But it sure appears the ball might be coming out even before he hits... a moot point, since IT TOUCHED THE FUCKING GROUND IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING THE CATCH.

Or should I use bold and giant text to explain it to the morons?

If you view and pause the video I posted at precisely 1:01 you will see that his hip AND his hand are both in bounds. It's a different, closer angle. Don't make me post a print screen, you colossal moron.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Go to 0:58 into this video

And

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:If you view and pause the video I posted at precisely 1:01

Make up your damn mind already.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:you colossal moron.

One of us is quite familiar with the rules of a catch, one of us has proven woefully ignorant.

The latter is now tossing "collossal moron" around, even though he's been proven wrong over and over.

So, I guess I do have to resort to:


THE BALL TOUCHED THE GROUND WHEN A RECEIVER WENT TO THE GROUND IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING A CATCH.


Does the extra amount of black pixels on your screen help with your alarming confusion on a longstanding rule that been called myriad times in the last decade?

You guys still beating this dead horse? Guess I'll take another whack or two.

Dins is stoned, Mace is blind, and Bsmack is parsing :58 vs 1:01 because he's full of shit and knows it.

The refs blew the call on the field and in the booth. At no point did he ever lose control of the ball. You can see in the slo-mo replay that he made a conscious decision to release his grip on the ball after he hit the ground with both feet, his ass, and then his free hand all well in bounds (and the SJ had thrust his arms up signaling TD).

War Wagon wrote:You can see in the slo-mo replay that he made a conscious decision to release his grip on the ball after he hit the ground...

Now you're a fucking mind reader? Wow. Just wow.

BSmack wrote:Now you're a fucking mind reader? Wow. Just wow.

I bet you Wags can tell us what we all think of him right now.

War Wagon wrote:You can see in the slo-mo replay that he made a conscious decision to release his grip on the ball after he hit the ground with both feet, his ass, the ball, and then his free hand all well in bounds (and the SJ had thrust his arms up signaling TD).

FTFY, ignoramus.

Go Coogs' wrote:

BSmack wrote:Now you're a fucking mind reader? Wow. Just wow.

I bet you Wags can tell us what we all think of him right now.

Bet I don't care, mouse in the pocket pussy. I love it when twats like you go for the herd mentality... when there isn't even a herd.

------------------------

Yes Bri, he made a conscious decision to relax and release his grip on the ball. That's easy to see.

It's not mind reading but if I could've read his mind he'd probably be thinking "TOUCHDOWN, motherfuckers".

War Wagon wrote:Bet I don't care, mouse in the pocket pussy. I love it when twats like you go for the herd mentality

Sorry, wags. I forgot the [obligatory][/obligatory] and Goobs signature.

Dinsdale wrote:They certainly are not incapable of mistakes, by any means.

But in this case, they didn't make one.

1. If everyone knows the receiver must "come to a stop," to signify that the process of the catch is complete, it's pretty odd that the official standing right there missed it, because Johnson body didn't "stop," and that is very obvious.

2. What is written in the rulebook doesn't back up what you are selling, Dins.


So again, if they want to deny a TD catch like that, they better rewrite the rulebook, because right now, they are up to their eyes in bullshit.

BSmack wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Go to 0:58 into this video

And

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:If you view and pause the video I posted at precisely 1:01

Make up your damn mind already.

0:58 is when he starts coming down with the ball, however, if you pause it at exactly 1:01 you will see a still of his hip, as well as his hand, down on the ground and in bounds.

pop, who cares what the rule FROM THE OFFICIAL FUCKING RULEBOOK STATES? Dins heard an "explanation" from some refs, at one point or another, so we're all straight on this issue. mmkay?

Dinsdale wrote: FTFY, ignoramus.

You didn't fix shit and you're still wrong.

Can you even see? I question your vision or the cognitive ability of your brain to interpret what your eyes just witnessed. Either that, or you only see what you want to see.

His free hand hit the ground first (clearly in bounds, as is that even fucking matters after both feet and his ass had already hit paydirt) and then his hand that had the ball firmly in the grasp before he let go.

I say again, he never lost control of the ball until the time he decided to let go... which was well after the catch had been completed.

You've tried to make a big deal of the fact the ball touched the ground at some point, long after numerous other body parts had already done so. He still had possesion when that ball touched the ground which is an incontrovertible fact.

You tried to say his other hand was out of bounds, which it wasn't, though it wouldn't have mattered if it were being as how his feet and ass had touched first. In bounds.

You're either stupid, blind, or trolling. Which is it?

You guys are still talking about this? Shit...I'm onto this epic Shaun Hill vs. Mike Vick matchup this Sunday.

IndyFrisco wrote:Dins,

Go ahead and start working on your response to HyperboleHeadInTheSandDude. Here's the question:

So when a receiver catches the ball while running and spikes it before he comes to a complete stop, is that not a touchdown?

or...

So when a receiver catches the ball diving and pops up to his feet without coming to a complete stop and then hands the ball to the ref, is that not a touchdown?

or...

That's not in the rule book.

poptart wrote:

Dinsdale wrote:They certainly are not incapable of mistakes, by any means.

But in this case, they didn't make one.

1. If everyone knows the receiver must "come to a stop," to signify that the process of the catch is complete, it's pretty odd that the official standing right there missed it, because Johnson body didn't "stop," and that is very obvious.

2. What is written in the rulebook doesn't back up what you are selling, Dins.


So again, if they want to deny a TD catch like that, they better rewrite the rulebook, because right now, they are up to their eyes in bullshit.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-high ... 18-yard-TD



He didn't raise the football and complete the "2nd act," fucktard official.

He DROPPED the ball. lol



Both this and the Johnson play were TD's, btw.


Just make up some more bullshit, league.