Was the 2nd and goal play a TD? (Poll)

First of all, what a game. What a great freaking win to get this squad to 5-0 for the first time in the history of forever for this franchise. Great job team!

My question: why wasn't the 2nd and goal throw to DK Metcalf ruled a touchdown?
He had possession, two feet in the endzone, then the ball gets jarred loose.
I mean, how doesn't that even warrant a booth review?
I recall a play a few seasons ago when Wilson threw it to a receiver (Moore?) Who caught it, two feet down, then gets hit and the ball popped loose. They called it incomplete on the field, Carroll challenged it and they overruled it and called it a catch.

Thankfully it all worked out, and in our favor as more time eventually came off the clock before the crucial 4th and goal catch by DK.

What are your thoughts? Was that a catch?

The play I'm talking about is at 13:05

[youtube]1YIigArbYoo[/youtube]

A perfect example of a misinterpretation of rules. Since DK was in the end zone and caught the ball established control and was in bounds, the play is over. The defender came over afterwards and punched it out after he was out of bounds. Again plays over.
I can understand maintaining control to the ground when the ball is in the field of play. He had control while in bounds. Reminds me of loop hole crap attorneys use to get the guilty out of trouble. Things like this are dishonest and what the English call “Bad form”.

Agree. It worked out like it should. Less time left for Minnesota to have.

Based upon the ruling in the 2011 AFC title game between NE/BAL, where a Ravens receiver clearly caught the ball and had full possession/control (he was basically standing still) for a split second before a Patriots defender punched it out of his hands, I'm going to say no. That was a completely BS call. Since the league was apparently OK with it, then that's where we are with this play, which was far less definitive.

I doubt they would have overturned it anyway, but I don’t get why there was no booth review.

It would be an incomplete pass anywhere else on the field, so no TD for me.

IMO, it was a TD. I also believe the last play of the game was an incomplete pass as well.

themunn":1689qz5a said:

It would be an incomplete pass anywhere else on the field, so no TD for me.

Click to expand...

The rules for a catch actually do change a bit in the endzone, so this opinion above is misguided.

TreeRon":94cyzcn2 said:

IMO, it was a TD. I also believe the last play of the game was an incomplete pass as well.

Click to expand...

I was wondering about that last Cousin's pass as well.. Watching the replay, you could clearly see his arm getting hit by the defender before.. moments before his arm starts the forward motion. Perhaps it's like catching the ball, need control of it and if the defender hinders the pass before the arms going forward, it's a fumble? IDK, I was really surprised it wasn't over turned.

I don't know what the rules currently say on this, but I want the rules to consider that an incomplete pass. It didn't look like or feel like a catch.

TreeRon":ktw0g30f said:

IMO, it was a TD. I also believe the last play of the game was an incomplete pass as well.

Click to expand...

DK caught it, made a football move by getting both feet in, then it got knocked out of hus hands.

That last play was a incomplete pass, but with 1-2 seconds left. Cousins wasn't throwing a Fluttie miracle in that rain. So in reality it didn't really matter what they called, it made no difference in the outcome.

TreeRon":1nsb9rpq said:

IMO, it was a TD. I also believe the last play of the game was an incomplete pass as well.

Click to expand...

I think you are wrong in both cases. JMO based on how I saw it.

I'm with you Jerhawk. DK caught it, broke the plane, and did not lose control until he was out of bounds. TD.

The 2 attempts by Cousins where he lost possession of the ball prior to his arm going into forward motion were too close to call without slow motion replay. The first was caused by the ball getting knocked from his hand, so that one is easier, and should have been a TD for us. Luckily we converted anyway.
Crazy game start to finish.... like most of our games seem to be for last 2 years.

HawkStrong":ei4dbpps said:

themunn":ei4dbpps said:

It would be an incomplete pass anywhere else on the field, so no TD for me.

Click to expand...

The rules for a catch actually do change a bit in the endzone, so this opinion above is misguided.

Click to expand...

In what way though? The NFL official rules say this:

A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) in the field of play, at the sideline, or in the end zone if a player, who is inbounds:

a. secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

b. touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

c. after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

Click to expand...

I don't see the football move (in this case, a tuck, or maintaining control throughout). As announcers would say it was a "Bang bang" play - for me Metcalf doesn't hold onto it long enough for it to be a football move.

Appyhawk":13vdcrk1 said:

I'm with you Jerhawk. DK caught it, broke the plane, and did not lose control until he was out of bounds. TD.

Click to expand...

That's not the rule though. The rule is he has to maintain possession to the ground, and he didn't.

This is the Calvin Johnson rule that the league changed in 2010 after a very controversial call with Johnson in the end zone.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/949 ... hange-most

The old rule was two feet in the end zone with possession was a TD. Now it's possession all the way to the ground. DK lost the ball on the ground. No TD.

It definitely wasn't a TD. You have to complete the catch through the process of going to the ground.

DK lost control of the ball AFTER HE TRAVELED OUT OF BOUNDS. He took two steps (that is a football move) after tucking the ball and before going out. TD.

Appyhawk":3p5lx6e1 said:

DK lost control of the ball AFTER HE TRAVELED OUT OF BOUNDS. He took two steps (that is a football move) after tucking the ball and before going out. TD.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if he ran all the way into the stands and fell down, he still has to maintain control of the ball to the ground. In bounds, out of bounds, doesn't matter.

This is a very clear rule now, there is no gray area. So you can not like it, but that's the rule.....and IMO it's a much better rule than it used to be. Too many controversial catch/non catches before this new rule.

Sgt. Largent":1cul79cs said:

Appyhawk":1cul79cs said:

I'm with you Jerhawk. DK caught it, broke the plane, and did not lose control until he was out of bounds. TD.

Click to expand...

That's not the rule though. The rule is he has to maintain possession to the ground, and he didn't.

This is the Calvin Johnson rule that the league changed in 2010 after a very controversial call with Johnson in the end zone.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/949 ... hange-most

The old rule was two feet in the end zone with possession was a TD. Now it's possession all the way to the ground. DK lost the ball on the ground. No TD.

Click to expand...

The Calvin Johnson rule does not exist any more. The league changed the catch rule in 2018 in order to simply it and make it easier for the officials. Here is a summary of the new rule. There is nothing in the rule about going to the ground or all the way through the ground that was the result of the Calvin Johnson touchdown/ non-touchdown.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spo ... atch-rule/

Frozenropers":hifuqa3l said:

Sgt. Largent":hifuqa3l said:

Appyhawk":hifuqa3l said:

I'm with you Jerhawk. DK caught it, broke the plane, and did not lose control until he was out of bounds. TD.

Click to expand...

That's not the rule though. The rule is he has to maintain possession to the ground, and he didn't.

This is the Calvin Johnson rule that the league changed in 2010 after a very controversial call with Johnson in the end zone.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/949 ... hange-most

The old rule was two feet in the end zone with possession was a TD. Now it's possession all the way to the ground. DK lost the ball on the ground. No TD.

Click to expand...

The Calvin Johnson rule does not exist any more. The league changed the catch rule in 2018 in order to simply it and make it easier for the officials. Here is a summary of the new rule. There is nothing in the rule about going to the ground or all the way through the ground that was the result of the Calvin Johnson touchdown/ non-touchdown.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spo ... atch-rule/

Click to expand...

It's the same rule, they just clarified the ground part.

The NFL rules state that a player going to the ground while attempting to make a catch must maintain control of the ball throughout the process before hitting the ground. ... If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete

Click to expand...

Again, can't lose control of the ball to the ground.

Yes, DK can lose control of the ball, but he also must regain control after hitting the ground. He did not.