• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Question about the catch/no catch bullshit.

W

Whatisfootball

Registered
Joined
Dec 17, 2017
Messages
62
Reaction score
48
Points
18
I’m having a really hard time with this crap. Someone explain please. Does it have anything to do with the amount of time he held the ball? Say he took three additional steps before falling, does that make it a fumble? There has to be a point where he becomes a runner with the ball. I just don’t know what it takes to become a runner I guess.

I won’t even get into the whole it was a touchdown on the field show me proof it hit the ground conversation.
 
Yeah but I’ve watched the other videos. The Dez no catch and all the rest. I want to understand what it takes to just become a guy with possession who fumbled the ball.
 
Whatisfootball said:
Yeah but I’ve watched the other videos. The Dez no catch and all the rest. I want to understand what it takes to just become a guy with possession who fumbled the ball.
Click to expand...

for one you have to not be playing the cheats
 
Rite the ball had crossed the line and his elbow was down so either I seen as a touchdown are we get the ball on the 1 yard line.

Sent from my Z981 using Steeler Nation mobile app
 
slashsteel said:
for one you have to not be playing the cheats
Click to expand...

the rules are:
1. Not be playing the cheats
2. Not be playing the cheats
3. Not be playing the cheats
4. Not be playing the cheats
5. Not be playing the cheats


the real question - what will Deebo be fined?
 
Whatisfootball said:
I’m having a really hard time with this crap. Someone explain please. Does it have anything to do with the amount of time he held the ball? Say he took three additional steps before falling, does that make it a fumble?
Click to expand...

Since that's not clarified in the rule book the refs will simply make a guess. Sometimes it's a catch if you're a Cheats receiver like Cooks in an earlier season game, and sometimes it's not like we saw with James yesterday. Apparently since Cooks "hopped" forward instead of stretching his arms, then bobbling the ball and having it hit the ground is ok.
 
Last edited:
The catch portion is basically “over” once he established possession with one knee down in the field of play. He clearly did both.

Still not down by contact, his next football move is to advance the ball and reach for the end zone.

At that point, breaking the plane is all that’s required.
 
You are all wrong

steelerstouchdownoverturned.jpg
 
The explanation is that a that a receiver and running back play by different rules. A receiver must maintain control after the ball crosses the plain, an RB doesn't.

The object of the ******* game is to get that ball over the plane of the goal line, which is exactly what James did.

That needs to be changed. Stupid rule. Who the **** thinks of this ****?
 
Apparently a "football move" is not taken into account any more. He caught the ball, landed on his knees and then dove (stretched out) to get the ball over the goal line. Then, when he finally did hit the ground, the ball moved. However, he never lost full possession. The ball never left his right hand. So, no matter how you look at it, I just don't understand the call.

The officials didn't even consider the fact that he made a move to extend the ball and get it across the goal line. The catch had already been made.
 
Stewey said:
The explanation is that a that a receiver and running back play by different rules. A receiver must maintain control after the ball crosses the plain, an RB doesn't.

The object of the ******* game is to get that ball over the plane of the goal line, which is exactly what James did.

That needs to be changed. Stupid rule. Who the **** thinks of this ****?
Click to expand...

The same dumb ***** that use terms like "football move", "survive the ground"...etc without ever establishing what any of it actually means.
 
Robbed. Stolen. Cheated. Ripped off. So much for that plane of the goal line horseshit with control and making a football move. Call on the field TD. I saw nothing to overturn that. The talking heads can dig out the rule book all they want,but I've seen more than enough plays that are tds just like that.

If frat boy free to taunt in the end zone Gronk does it,it's a td. I believe that 100%. It's a joke. Much like their 2 penalties for 4 ******* yards.
 
Stewey said:
The explanation is that a that a receiver and running back play by different rules. A receiver must maintain control after the ball crosses the plain, an RB doesn't.
Click to expand...

Then be prepared to overturn every time a receiver busts a swing pass for a 90 yd score and drops the ball as he somersaults or splashes into the end zone.
 
Recall the last time a stupid rule helped Brady win?

The tuck rule.
 
I mean, if 1 knee= 2 feet, it’s really no different that AB ‘s Immaculate Extension last Christmas.
 
TDX27 said:
Apparently a "football move" is not taken into account any more. He caught the ball, landed on his knees and then dove (stretched out) to get the ball over the goal line. Then, when he finally did hit the ground, the ball moved. However, he never lost full possession. The ball never left his right hand. So, no matter how you look at it, I just don't understand the call.

The officials didn't even consider the fact that he made a move to extend the ball and get it across the goal line. The catch had already been made.
Click to expand...

This!

I have been saying this all along and I am not hearing it from any of the talking heads. The ball never left his right hand. The ball can hit the ground. The ball can move. As long as the player always is in control of it. It never left his right hand that I could see.
 
No - you still don't understand - it was never a catch, the ball cannot hit the ground and move

WHEN A RECEIVER FALLS TO THE GROUND CATCHING A BALL IT MUST BE SECURED THROUGH CONTACT WITH GROUND BEFORE IT IS A CATCH
 
The craziest thing about this rule is that it doesn’t matter how long you possess the ball, it ain’t a catch if you’re falling. A receiver could lunge for an overthrown pass, haul it in and run while trying to regain his his balance, say 40 feet, but if he eventually falls and the ball comes out or moves after hitting the ground... Incomplete pass.
 
At what point does he become a runner with the football? There has to be a point when if the ball does come out it becomes a fumble.
 
To my mind, everyone becomes a runner who makes a “football move”. Assuming you’re not catching an end zone pass.

At that point, you're also no longer considered “defenseless” fwiw.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top