chris heff Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 Was it Donald Jones that had a TD catch but didn't hold it long enough?
What a Tuel Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 (edited) Nope, just watched it 3-4 times while Tasker told us why it was a good call. The defender hand his hands on it the whole time. Did Little still have control? I am not sure. But if i was a ref i would have to say no. And when Greg landed on his back he lost the ball. Is that what the Refs were basing it on. Little did have enough feet down, i just did not feel he had full control. Tasker said players will need to pretty much pop back up with the ball in their hands to prove control. Going to be harder to prove the catch this year i guess. Also i read that the call on the field is going to be harder to overturn. We shall see how this plays out during the season when it matters though. Can anyone bring up a link to the play !? Hmmm, it's tough for me to say he didn't have possession of the ball. That plus the 3 steps while holding on to it is enough for a TD in my eyes regardless of what happens afterwards. But I'll wait for someone to come up with a shot of it to see it again. Edit: Now that I think of it, that is two different scenarios. Did they rule it incomplete because it popped out at the end? Or because he didn't have possession and 2 feet in the end zone? For the ball to be popping out at the end to be relevant, they would need to concede that he had control and two feet down in the end zone. If that's the case then it was easily a catch imo. Edited August 21, 2016 by What a Tuel
3rdand12 Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 Hmmm, it's tough for me to say he didn't have possession of the ball. That plus the 3 steps while holding on to it is enough for a TD in my eyes regardless of what happens afterwards. But I'll wait for someone to come up with a shot of it to see it again. Yep i would like to see it again also. We can reconvene here to discuss. 26? Yolo?
mead107 Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 Should have been a TD. Ball has to go over the line. It did took several steps inbounds and 2 out of bounds. If he had gone straight to ground and ball came out , no TD. Had it for 5 - 6 steps. They need to change the f en rule.
3rdand12 Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 I have some issues of retention, but my thinking is, this year the Officials are more likely to call it incomplete when questionable. And less likely to overturn the call. Going to be on the Receiver to "prove " his possession and control ". I may or may not agree with whether Little made the catch, because at first blush i called touchdown !!! But i can see how it could be called the other way and then under review as all TD plays are now.I need to see it again
John from Riverside Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 I guess my whole problem with this is I HAVE NO DOUBT that we are going to see this exact same play ruled a touchdown against us and it will not be overturned by the refs.
Freddie's Dead Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 I guess my whole problem with this is I HAVE NO DOUBT that we are going to see this exact same play ruled a touchdown against us and it will not be overturned by the refs. This.
mead107 Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 I guess my whole problem with this is I HAVE NO DOUBT that we are going to see this exact same play ruled a touchdown against us and it will not be overturned by the refs.you got that right
simpleman Posted August 21, 2016 Author Posted August 21, 2016 Do you have a link to a video? I have been itching to see it. To me and the various instant replays it looked like he had control of the ball when he caught it. No bobbling other than re-positioning the ball to tuck it away. I agree. From the replays on TV he clearly had control and feet down. Tasker said he had to give the ball to the ref or obviously spike it. I though he was joking at first. I too would like to see the video of the angle you saw that was not shown in the broadcast. I guess my whole problem with this is I HAVE NO DOUBT that we are going to see this exact same play ruled a touchdown against us and it will not be overturned by the refs. Exactly. In the 2nd patriots game, Brady to Gronk. TD!
jethro_tull Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 The play yesterday ruled against Greg Little was actually a worse call than the famous Calvin Johnson "no catch" that was reversed. The Johnson ruling started a huge controversy and as someone mentioned earlier, the NFL reviewed this recently and still does not have it right. http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d81a77070/Controversial-call-on-Megatron-non-TD What blows my mind is the fact that if the throw to Little were a lateral or pitch-out run play (from where they were on the field) it would have been ruled a three yard gain because the ground cannot cause a fumble. The NFL needs some help defining and enforcing the rule logically. Little caught the ball and ran for at least two or three steps. At that point he hit the ground and the ball came loose. By the NFL's logic, as long as the defender had his hand on the ball, they could have ran upfield 20 yards like that and it still wouldn't have been a catch if it popped out when he hit the ground. Confusing to say the least.
Heitz Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 The ridiculous part of this one to me was that that even after Little got 2 or 3 steps in EZ and was on the ground out of bounds the DB continued to fight for the football and pried it loose. Is there a time limit on how long a defender can fight for the footbal! OUT OF BOUNDS? Little was clearly out of bounds when the football was pried loose. And this is kinda my problem with it - I get the rule, "must hold the ball FOREVER", but it's almost like they're extending the field of play, giving the defender another few feet to fight for the ball...
simpleman Posted August 21, 2016 Author Posted August 21, 2016 And this is kinda my problem with it - I get the rule, "must hold the ball FOREVER", but it's almost like they're extending the field of play, giving the defender another few feet to fight for the ball... I can imagine it now, as the home team player tosses the winning TD ball into the stands the defensive player leaps into the stands and intercepts the ball, Incomplete pass, no catch.LOL.
What a Tuel Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 I guess my whole problem with this is I HAVE NO DOUBT that we are going to see this exact same play ruled a touchdown against us and it will not be overturned by the refs. I looked at it the other way (bills being screwed out of a td when it matters), but thanks you made the possibilities worse!
machine gun kelly Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 I think the rule is ridiculous as well. The whole possession and then a football move thing vs. when we grew up was simple. Catch the ball, hold onto it, and get two feet in bounds. It just doesn't seem consistent as those sideline and end zone passes it's just that. I'm so sick of the endless debates on the radio, it's just not worth it. Polian on his late hits show defended it because otherwise he said there would be a needless increase of fumbles and would not be good for the game. His words, not mine.
LabattBlue Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 All you ever hear about if how they are going to simplify the whole what's a catch, what's not a catch. Instead it continues to be a mystery to players, coaches, announcers & fans.
DC Tom Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 There's a simple way to solve this controversy: Every receiver gets a sharpie. Upon catching the ball, they must sign the ball before the whistle blows. If the ref receives a ball from the receiver without a signature, it's an incomplete pass. If the defender gets the ball, unsigned, it's an interception. If the defender comes up with a signed ball, it's a fumble. It may cause a host of other problems...but at least we will finally have a single, coherent, definite decision of "catch."
jethro_tull Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 What are the rules for a catch on a pitch out or lateral? Basically don't fumble it. In fact if you don't "catch" it, it becomes a fumble. Why can't a forward pass catch be the same?
The Wiz Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 (edited) The more I read the more I want to see this play. From what I gather, he caught the ball, took a few steps into the ez, was tackled oob and then lost the ball? Didn't see the game so looking for clarity. Edited August 21, 2016 by The Wiz
Kelly the Dog Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 The more I read the more I want to see this play. From what I gather, he caught the ball, took a few steps into the ez, was tackled oob and then lost the ball?Yes, but most of the time the DB had his hand on the ball also, trying to pry it away. The ball was moving down Little's chest while he was getting two feet down although he always had "possession" of it. When they hit the ground OB the ball came loose. Fwiw I thought it was a catch.
vincec Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 (edited) First of all, Little's play should totally be a catch. However, the stupid rule as I understand it is that in order for the receiver to get credit for a catch, he needs to maintain control all the way to the ground or make a football move after getting possession. He can get the ball, get 4 steps in bounds and then 4 more out of bounds like Little did and still not have a catch if he loses it going to the ground. I think if he got two feet down and then made a move, like punching the DB in the face, it would have been a catch if he lost it afterwards. Similarly, if he never went to ground and the the DB knocked it out after he was out of bounds but standing up, then I think it would have been ruled a catch. Edited August 21, 2016 by vincec
Recommended Posts