The fools running the NFL have ruined this game!

What the heck is a catch any more? Who knows? Let’s make up a different rule every game!

Reaneypark":2t8x4g7b said:

What the heck is a catch any more? Who knows? Let’s make up a different rule every game!

Click to expand...

I dont understand how that isnt a TD....his knee was literally down and ball was over the goalline.....

By the letter of the rule that was an incomplete pass.

Doesn't mean it should have been incomplete. Imo it was a good catch and touchdown. However by the written rules the overturn was correct.

I thought the rule was the play can only be reversed by clear and irrefutable evidence. By that standard it should have stood as called and following that standard would cut down on the excessive reviews.

If that play happened in the open field, it would have been incomplete. Same rules apply. His knee being down has nothing to whether it's a catch or not. He could have had both knees and all four elbows down. Makes no difference. He was falling during the act of the catch and didn't survive the ground. The ball came out and touched turf. Incomplete.

I'm really not sure why this play is so controversial.

naholmes":1c4dc7us said:

I thought the rule was the play can only be reversed by clear and irrefutable evidence. By that standard it should have stood as called and following that standard would cut down on the excessive reviews.

Click to expand...

It was very clear that the ball came out and he lost posession as it touched the turf.

It’s maddening because it is inconsistently applied. It was not clear because the ball did not come out. One hand slipped off and the ball shifted but the other hand stayed in contact with the ball the entire time. I’ve seen many instances where the ball shifts on ground contact but they say the players maintained control because their hand was under it. Not sure how you can say it’s clear and obvious because so many, who know the rule, are saying otherwise.

I dont get why its so hard for people to understand the rule.

naholmes":3m6vlc3h said:

It’s maddening because it is inconsistently applied. It was not clear because the ball did not come out. One hand slipped off and the ball shifted but the other hand stayed in contact with the ball the entire time. I’ve seen many instances where the ball shifts on ground contact but they say the players maintained control because their hand was under it. Not sure how you can say it’s clear and obvious because so many, who know the rule, are saying otherwise.

Click to expand...

1 - It was obvious the ball came out
2 - It was obvious the ball hit the ground
3 - It was obvious that the receiver was falling to the ground

Easy call.

Yes, there are cases where this rule was improperly called (or not called), but this isn't one of them.

IrishNW":3mf90hy7 said:

I dont get why its so hard for people to understand the rule.

Click to expand...

This. It is fairly clearly written out. I don't think it is comprehension so much as cognitive dissonance between what THEY think a catch is and what the RULES say a catch is.

Click on link for more from the NFL



https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/completing-a-catch/

It was a lot easier of call back in the day..
Get ball and if two feet touched ground it was a catch.
None of this got to turn and run 3 steps or whatever.
If you caught it the ground cannot cause a fumble.
It was like a Rb and the play was kept where you landed.
None of this hit ground it rolls out of endzone or whatever clown BS calls they use.

The rule book needs to be streamlined and simplified. The weekly flagfest is killing the game.
Call the obvious stuff, and not the stuff you “think you may have seen”.

Also end this “emphasis” crap.

You used to be able to tell easily what a catch was and what PI was, now? Not even the announcers or former head of officials know anymore.

Maybe college rules should apply. One foot inbounds, don't drop the damned ball.

Sox-n-Hawks":w9g84ccc said:

Maybe college rules should apply. One foot inbounds, don't drop the damned ball.

Click to expand...

Would rather have that then the mishmash thats the catch rule now.

It is not difficult to understand but there is subjectivity in whether the player did or did not “maintain control”. If the ball rolls away then it’s clear but here James’ left hand slipped off and the ball moved slightly while the right hand was still under the ball. Using two hands is not required and there is a chance he maintained control with only one hand so I think it should have stood as called.

The rule is pretty clear: if it happens against the Patriots, it's not a catch.

Part of the problem is the difference btwn a runner and a receiver crossing the plane of the goal line and maintaining possession on a catch but as far as I'm concerned if you have possession anytime in the end zone it should be a TD : end of story whether you control it to the ground or not
Yes many rules need to be streamlined as I tried to get my son into it but the rules were to contradicting themselves for him to have enough attention span to repeat being totally confused by the rules week after week to have any desire to get into a rhythm of watching and enjoying foot ball . We watch it and are sitting on the edge of our seats every time but if you weren't a fan a dozen years ago it's hard to start because everything is so convoluted that you can't get into a groove cuz it just isn't there to get into
Stupid NFL
:les: :stirthepot: :2thumbs: :irishdrinkers:
Happy freakin new year btw bit%^&s

They willingly allowed their brand to be hijacked, to further the sociopolitical agenda of George Soros and his NGO network. To me, that's damn near unforgivable. Given that they did nothing to act while the quality of the brand was clearly in decline as a result of the "protests", I have to wonder what sort of blackmail they keep on Roger Goodell.