Pickens catch/no catch along sidelines

[Sherlock Holmes]

1 hour ago, Big Turk said:

Was I the only one who was screaming at Nantz and Romo as they kept wondering aloud why that wasn't a catch and urging the Steelers to challenge?

 

How do these announcers see so many games live, get paid to know things like why that wasn't a catch(basic rules) and STILL never seem to know these things??

 

It wasn't a catch because a hand being down DOES NOT count towards determining whether a player is in bounds or not. Has to be feet or a body part(wrist, elbow, butt, knee, etc)

 

He clearly had one foot down in bounds and then his elbow came down out of bounds.

 

Clear no catch. Easy rule to know. How do these announcers not know basic rules when they are paid to know this stuff??

My old A&P professor is going to ***** a brick when I tell him the hand is not considered a body part...

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Big Turk said:

 

Actually I haven't...never worked in a place with a fryer.

 

May have forgot to comment a line of code before I pushed it up tho.

If you ever do, imo opinion it’s borderline impossible to leave the fries in too long. 

[Pete]

One hand = two feet.  Stupid refs

[buffaloboyinATL]

2 hours ago, What a Tuel said:

 

Eh Romo was on everyones nerves hyping up Pickett at the beginning of the game I think. Like is this a Bills home game or what? The talking up of the guy before he even threw a ball was nauseating. 

Ha, even a friend of mine who is a Steelers fan said it was over the top.  

[gonzo1105]

Pickens was really good early on. The one thing I didn’t like was as the game got out of hand, he was running his routes half assed. Pickett and You are the future of Pittsburgh, run the routes with some conviction for your QB 

[TNBills]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

One hand = two feet.  Stupid refs

That isn't the rule. One elbow, knee, shin, shoulder = 2 feet. 

[LABILLBACKER]

3 hours ago, Big Turk said:

Was I the only one who was screaming at Nantz and Romo as they kept wondering aloud why that wasn't a catch and urging the Steelers to challenge?

 

How do these announcers see so many games live, get paid to know things like why that wasn't a catch(basic rules) and STILL never seem to know these things??

 

It wasn't a catch because a hand being down DOES NOT count towards determining whether a player is in bounds or not. Has to be feet or a body part(wrist, elbow, butt, knee, etc)

 

He clearly had one foot down in bounds and then his elbow came down out of bounds.

 

Clear no catch. Easy rule to know. How do these announcers not know basic rules when they are paid to know this stuff??

Romo even went as far as saying the Steeler booth guys must not have been paying attention. 

[JDubya76]

3 hours ago, Simon said:

 

Sometimes people make mistakes on the job.

I'm sure you've never left the fries in the fryer a bit too long. 🤷‍♂️

I wouldn’t be too tough on Nantz, his mom just died. Difficult day of work for him today.

[Rochesterfan]

1 minute ago, LABILLBACKER said:

Romo even went as far as saying the Steeler booth guys must not have been paying attention. 

 

Yep - Romo was running a pretty dumb narrative until somebody got in his ear to tell him it was incomplete.

 

Just absolutely butchered the call - at one point saying he got both feet down.

 

The Bills stadium is also one of the better to see both live and on the booths - just a really bad day by Romo.

 

 

[PromoTheRobot]

3 hours ago, Big Turk said:

Was I the only one who was screaming at Nantz and Romo as they kept wondering aloud why that wasn't a catch and urging the Steelers to challenge?

 

How do these announcers see so many games live, get paid to know things like why that wasn't a catch(basic rules) and STILL never seem to know these things??

 

It wasn't a catch because a hand being down DOES NOT count towards determining whether a player is in bounds or not. Has to be feet or a body part(wrist, elbow, butt, knee, etc)

 

He clearly had one foot down in bounds and then his elbow came down out of bounds.

 

Clear no catch. Easy rule to know. How do these announcers not know basic rules when they are paid to know this stuff??

 

That needs to be changed. 

[Rochesterfan]

Just now, PromoTheRobot said:

 

That needs to be changed. 

 

Nope because then on a run or catch - if the hand goes down - you would need to call the runner down by contact.

 

They are very specific about the hands not counting to keep it consistent for balance checks on other plays where the hands hit the ground.

 

 

 

 

[Big Turk]

13 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

That needs to be changed. 

 

No it doesn't, it is correct. A wrist counts, a hand doesn't. Literally straight from the NFL rulebook:

 

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

 

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

 

In the Pickens example his hand hits, which doesn't count, then one foot and then his next body part is his elbow out of bounds. In college, that's a catch. Same with Diontae Johnson in the endzone, he got one foot in. In the NFL, nope.

Edited October 10, 2022 by Big Turk

[JoPoy88]

3 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

Haha, OK, I can be a little anal on some things

All good man i get it lol

[Just Jack]

Was that the catch that caused the Steelers to take the lead and win the game?  No?  Ok, I'm not going to worry about it then. 

[What a Tuel]

2 hours ago, Just Jack said:

Was that the catch that caused the Steelers to take the lead and win the game?  No?  Ok, I'm not going to worry about it then. 

 

What's funny is that if this was a determining factor in the Bills losing or something, people would say the thread is just whining about the loss.

 

This just goes to show we talk about literally everything on this forum, its far more active than most of the nfl team forums.

[BillsShredder83]

I've watched a ton of ball and don't know that I've seen this come up before, I didn't know.

 

My first opinion was that it should be a rule change because it's a more athletic feat in a way... don't see any gimmicky way it could be used to game the system, just an athletic play....

 

But then I saw the down by contact argument and it makes more sense

[Spiderweb]

13 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

Sorry...I take pride in doing my job and I don't make 17 million a year. Not sure why they can't take pride in theirs.

Human perfection does not exist. Give it a rest.

[Big Turk]

11 hours ago, Pete said:

One hand = two feet.  Stupid refs

 

Wrong. Read the rule book. A hand does not count in terms of being in bounds.  

 

It's two feet or any other body part excluding hands.

Edited October 10, 2022 by Big Turk

[SoCal Deek]

The refs appear to have gotten it correct. What I want to know is why is the rule written that way? Having watched the play it sure seems to me like that should be a catch. I wonder what circumstance the NFL foresaw that made them write the rule the way they did. Anybody?

Edited October 10, 2022 by SoCal Deek