Rayzer32 Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 (edited) I have never seen a more incompetent call in my time as a fan of the NFL. The ref even watched the video replay and STILL had the balls to call this an incomplete catch. Amazing this stuff can happen nowadays. Nice job Goodell, keep up the good work with your moronic rule changes. Incomplete??? Edited September 12, 2010 by Rayzer32 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 screwed! How the hell was that not overturned?!?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 Yep, that's incomplete. Rule clearly states you have to maintain control after you hit the ground. Johnson didn't - easy call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 Unreal. Bad teams get robbed... there is no way that is not a catch, and if the idiotic rule wording says it is not, then the rule is wrong. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 Awesome, I had the Bears in my pools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobobonators Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 (edited) Yep, that's incomplete. Rule clearly states you have to maintain control after you hit the ground. Johnson didn't - easy call. It's clear that he dropped the ball to go celebrate; he had already landed on the ground w/ his entire body. Does the player need to take the ball back with him to the bench for it to be ruled a TD? Maybe he should maintain possession until he gets home and goes to bed. This call is w/o a doubt the most ridiculous interpretation of the rule I've seen. Edited September 12, 2010 by bobobonators Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 It was the right call. You should be arguing the rule, not the call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 Apparently, according to NFL rules, that was incomplete, but it really shouldn't be and probably wouldn't have been depending on how you interpret the rule Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 Guess the Lions aren't winning the Super Bowl this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 It was the right call. You should be arguing the rule, not the call. EXACTLY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 Yep, that's incomplete. Rule clearly states you have to maintain control after you hit the ground. Johnson didn't - easy call. correct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayzer32 Posted September 12, 2010 Author Share Posted September 12, 2010 Yep, that's incomplete. Rule clearly states you have to maintain control after you hit the ground. Johnson didn't - easy call. But if you have two feet in bounds a millisecond before you are out of bounds, that's a completion? Or if a player crosses the goal line and the ball immediately gets knocked out of his hands or he drops it, that's also a TD? These rules are completely idiotic. Just like putting the Ump behind the QB which has ALREADY been changed. The league gets weaker and weaker by the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huuuge Bills Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 So he catches it, turns in air, gets two feet down, a knee down, and an elbow down before the ball comes out. But it's still no catch? What a load of crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayzer32 Posted September 12, 2010 Author Share Posted September 12, 2010 It was the right call. You should be arguing the rule, not the call. Don't know if you read my main post, but I was questioning the moronic rule. Just sayin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 It was the right call. You should be arguing the rule, not the call. Stojan FTW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 I actually like the rule. I was so tired of all the guess work that was involved with "did he show control before it came loose when he hit the ground?" stuff. This way it's clear. You hold onto the ball the entire time - even if the ball touches the ground as you roll - and it's a catch. If it comes free it's incomplete. Cut and dry - that's the way I like my football rules, less room for interpretation from the refs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonInBuffalo Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 The people complaining simply don't understand the rule. Here's the logic behind it. We've all heard the expression "the ground can't cause a fumble." That's the rule when a player is already in possession of the ball. If he has possession, and falls to the ground, he is down, even if the ball comes out. When a receiver, catches a pass and falls to the ground in the process, he is in the process of gaining possession. He doesn't have possession yet. So if the ball comes out during that process, it's an incomplete pass. The way the rule is written is much more consistent than something arbitrary such as two feet down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 Don't know if you read my main post, but I was questioning the moronic rule. Just sayin. But you also said "I have never seen a more incompetent call in my time as a fan of the NFL. The ref even watched the video replay and STILL had the balls to call this an incomplete catch." The call was, well, very competent. He would have had to "have balls" to call it complete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayzer32 Posted September 12, 2010 Author Share Posted September 12, 2010 I actually like the rule. I was so tired of all the guess work that was involved with "did he show control before it came loose when he hit the ground?" stuff. This way it's clear. You hold onto the ball the entire time - even if the ball touches the ground as you roll - and it's a catch. If it comes free it's incomplete. Cut and dry - that's the way I like my football rules, less room for interpretation from the refs. It's just another rule that the officials will mis-interpret time and again. I'm sure another official may have ruled it the other way 100% of the time. Too many inconsistencies with the officials in this league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 But if you have two feet in bounds a millisecond before you are out of bounds, that's a completion? Or if a player crosses the goal line and the ball immediately gets knocked out of his hands or he drops it, that's also a TD? These rules are completely idiotic. Just like putting the Ump behind the QB which has ALREADY been changed. The league gets weaker and weaker by the day. Have to have two feet inbounds , control of the ball including landing with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts