Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, ngbills said:

How was Andrews being pushed down on the fumble return not a block in the back?

Joe Burrow is too calm, cool and collected for the refs to throw that flag.

Posted
33 minutes ago, ngbills said:

How was Andrews being pushed down on the fumble return not a block in the back?

It absolutely was. A lesser block cost the Bills a TD in playoff game vs Houston a few years ago. 

Posted

Just watched the replay of fumble return. Wasn't that a block in the back @ the 30 yard line. Bengals player pushed him right down from behind!

 

??

1 hour ago, ngbills said:

How was Andrews being pushed down on the fumble return not a block in the back?

Heinous! /smdh

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
5 hours ago, TheBrownBear said:

Harbaugh and Staley should be booking their flights to Thailand right now.

That should be the new quote for any coach that gets fired for now on lol....Kingsbury setting a trend

Posted

The Ravens.... OMG what a tease. On the 2 yard line, a chance to take the lead and then that stupid fumble happens.  I wouldnt have tried that play with an inexperienced QB. Then Cinci get the benefit of their punter faking contact to get a penalty in one of the worst acting jobs on contact, Ive ever seen. Of course the gullible refs buy it and give them that call in a playoff game? That killed another few mins of the game for Cinci.  (He actually tried to do it again on the next punt!). The final play on the Hail Mary and with their best receivers on, season on the line and the ball deflects right to the Baltimore player (at slow speed no less) and all he does is do a clumsy paw at the ball?? ARRRRGHHHHH!!!

Posted

Check out the 2nd biggest play of the game. Here we have 3rd & 9 from midfield. This completion would move the chains, and the Bengals would go on to score their last offensive points of the game and make it 17-10.

 

Except it wasn't a catch. Chase gets two feet down before the cb dislodges control. By the time he regains control his second foot lands out of bounds. 

 

Would they have gone for it 4th & 9 from midfield? 

 

 

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

Check out the 2nd biggest play of the game. Here we have 3rd & 9 from midfield. This completion would move the chains, and the Bengals would go on to score their last offensive points of the game and make it 17-10.

 

Except it wasn't a catch. Chase gets two feet down before the cb dislodges control. By the time he regains control his second foot lands out of bounds. 

 

Would they have gone for it 4th & 9 from midfield? 

 

 

 

To me it looked like he clearly gained control after the catch, then started to lose it just as he was going out of bounds? Don't see how that isn't a catch...

Posted
Just now, KellysHandWarmer said:

To me it looked like he clearly gained control after the catch, then started to lose it just as he was going out of bounds? Don't see how that isn't a catch...

 

He did gain control, but never got two feet down after he lost control. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

Cause he lost control of the ball before completing the catch. 

I see that the ball control rules are VERY confusing in the NFL, reading in more detail... What would he have had to do to "fully" complete the catch? He established control while clearly having both feet in bounds.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, KellysHandWarmer said:

I see that the ball control rules are VERY confusing in the NFL, reading in more detail... What would he have had to do to "fully" complete the catch? He established control while clearly having both feet in bounds.

 

Yeah, just read the rule. Or does clarify things a bit. 

 

To complete the catch he has to make a "move common to the game." Which I don't think he does. Though the rule says taking a 3rd step counts as a move common to the game, they've ruled no catch this year after 4 steps and then the ball moves when they go to the ground... 

 

So assuming the catch wasn't completed, by  rule he doesn't have to get two feet down again after a loss of control. It's  no catch if he's touching out of bounds when he re-establishes control. But if he's touching in bounds when he re-establishes control it's a catch after he survives the ground.

 

It's much closer to a catch than I thought, there would have to be a camera angle showing part of his foot touching out of bounds when we re-establishes control. 

 

 

 

Edited by Motorin'
Posted
10 hours ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Just watched the replay of fumble return. Wasn't that a block in the back @ the 30 yard line. Bengals player pushed him right down from behind!

 

??

Heinous! /smdh

Easy call to make since there was no other players in the way etc. NFL wanted CIN v BUF...

  • Agree 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

To complete the catch he has to make a "move common to the game." Which I don't think he does. Though the rule says taking a 3rd step counts as a move common to the game, they've ruled no catch this year after 4 steps and the ball moves when they go to the ground... 

 

So assuming the catch wasn't completed, by the rule he doesn't have to get two feet down again after a loss of control. It's  no catch if he's touching out of bounds when he re-establishes control. But if he's touching in bounds when he re-establishes control it's a catch after he survives the ground.

 

It's much closer to a catch than I thought, there would have to be a camera angle showing part of his foot touching out of bounds when we re-establishes control. 

 

 

 

Thanks for explaining. Sounds, too, like there is a discrepancy between the rules and what is sometimes called on the field... as seems to be the case with so many penalties that are inconsistently called.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, KellysHandWarmer said:

I see that the ball control rules are VERY confusing in the NFL, reading in more detail... What would he have had to do to "fully" complete the catch? He established control while clearly having both feet in bounds.

It's confusing because it's different as depending if it's in bounds or out of bounds. 

  • Agree 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

He did gain control, but never got two feet down after he lost control. 

He had control.  Got two feet in bounds then fumbled. 

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...