The Coleman non-touchdown

[ToGoGo]

10 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

If you play any sport, you know that was a great catch. The NFL’s rules sometimes conflict with common sense.

This is what it comes down to at the end of the day. 
 

People are arguing over technical minutiae invented out of thin air by corporate employees of the NFL. 
 

Any rule that tells you Coleman’s catch shouldn’t count, should be thrown in the dumpster. 

[Dan in Owego]

Either way exciting developments for the young man, should be a breakout for his confidence moving forward👍

[Rochesterfan]

1 minute ago, Turf Toejam 34 said:

The challenge call was the one that I was trying to figure out.   Was it explained what was Callahan challenging?    Was it a sneaky way to challenge the part of the call that could get overturned in full if Kincaid had indeed been ruled as not catching it?    Is our rules guru watching film on that during the week so we can take advantage of that.

 

The coaches can tell them what they are challenging, but during review they are looking for other reviewable aspects and in this case which is rare - they realized not that Kincaid failed to make the catch, but that he fumbled before he was down.  They made a change to the ruling and therefore - even though the it did not prove to be what was challenged- the play was changed and therefore technically the Titans are not penalized.

 

This is a rare occurrence and is typically seen on challenges to spotting of the ball where the ball is moved either forward or backwards a few inches and therefore the challenge is acceptable, but the outcome may not be changed - such as the guy was still short of getting a first down.  It is not something to really take advantage of - it is just a minor outcome of a play.

[bmur66]

It looked like a TD to me. 

[Mikie2times]

Leave it to our fans to argue a clearly correct call. The rule is logical. You can’t score unless you fully possess the ball. How would it be any different? 

[Billy Claude]

6 minutes ago, Turf Toejam 34 said:

The challenge call was the one that I was trying to figure out.   Was it explained what was Callahan challenging?    Was it a sneaky way to challenge the part of the call that could get overturned in full if Kincaid had indeed been ruled as not catching it?    Is our rules guru watching film on that during the week so we can take advantage of that.

 

On review, it was ruled that Kincaid fumbled the ball forward so the ball was spotted in the wrong place.   Since there was a change in the ruling the challenge was technically successful.

[Mikie2times]

4 minutes ago, ToGoGo said:

This is what it comes down to at the end of the day. 
 

People are arguing over technical minutiae invented out of thin air by corporate employees of the NFL. 
 

Any rule that tells you Coleman’s catch shouldn’t count, should be thrown in the dumpster. 

The ball was moving. He never caught it. It was obvious. 

[Orlando Buffalo]

The ball was moving and I would have been pissed if the call was upheld against us. Keon is appearing to be improving quickly and he won't make that mistake again so I am happy with overall final decision 

[Matt_In_NH]

You have to complete the catch, he did not.  It was pretty obvious, even the commentators worked out the reasoning. 

[Doc]

Is there an angle from the other side?  I can't see the ball moving in the one provided.

[MJS]

He didn't establish possession before it entered the end zone, and then he bobbled it as he stepped out of bounds. So, the ball was never in anyone's possession at any time, so it was an incomplete pass. I think the refs got it right.

[Livinginthepast]

4 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

Yes you are wrong because he needs to complete the catch - it is total different than a runner at the goal line.

 

The 2 steps for a completion do not start until the player has control of the ball.  He gets it in 1 hand, loses control as the ball slides down into his mid section - regains control and gets 1 foot in and one foot out of bounds.  It is not a catch anywhere on the field of play since he did not get both feet down in bounds with control of the ball.

 

The goal line only matters if the player has control - such as a running play.  A passing play still requires the player to make the catch.  I feel for Coleman because it was a great effort and he literally made a superb attempt, but the defender looked to just free up the ball and force him to regather and his toe was just out of bounds.  
 

Sucks, but it was the right call and the same reason the Kincaid catch last week was not challenged - you must maintain that control and get your feet down.

 

It was also why the Kincaid catch today was a catch and fumble as he got 2 feet down and dove forward completing the play as the ball was knocked out and ruled a fumble.

 

 

 

I think he has it in his grasp in control and he breaks the plain of the GL. In the pre idiot rules NFL of the 20th C, that is a TD. But your argument I think is correct. The NFL doesnt call that a catch any more.

[Billz4ever]

You still have to establish possession and he never really had control before going out of bounds.

 

[Royale with Cheese]

I don't like the rule but it's the rule.  The ruling on the field was correct.

[Augie]

42 minutes ago, ClemsonBills said:

The NFL is still trying to figure out its own rules

 

…and the Jags get to play “road games” in London. 

 

Two weeks in a row. 

 

Again. 

[Scott7975]

22 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

But he DID have control when crossing the plane.

The ball didn’t move until after he was in the endzone.

 

He didn't complete the act of the catch before he stepped out of bounds. Imagine he didn't step out of bounds but dropped the ball instead.  Imagine it wasn't in the endzone but just a side line play. You are stuck on this crossing the goal line thing and I get it but you still have to complete the act of the catch. He didn't. 

[Einstein]

35 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

The 2 steps for a completion do not start until the player has control of the ball.  

 

There were 3 full feet down before ball came out though.

 

Edited yesterday at 01:49 AM by Einstein

[LABILLBACKER]

40 minutes ago, zow2 said:

If this play happened, in an important late season or playoff game that was close, i’d be furious.  To have to slow it down to micro frames to find a wobble is absurd.  In real time that was a TD catch and not even close to being an incompletion.

Could you imagine the fan meltdown if that was a SB game winning catch.  The NFL has an obligation to it's fans to clean up this convoluted embarrassing rule.

[Rochesterfan]

2 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

 

🤦‍♂️.   Nice view - you can clearly see his had is already off the ball by step 2.  

 

It perfectly shows why it is not a catch.  If he had control wouldn’t the ball stay where it was - it is moving and therefore not a catch.

 

If you think this is a TD - show me other examples where a guy bobbles the ball as he is in the process and gets the completion.

 

This is 100% incomplete as at no time does he have full control because the defender did his job.

 

 

 

[MJS]

14 minutes ago, Livinginthepast said:

I think he has it in his grasp in control and he breaks the plain of the GL. In the pre idiot rules NFL of the 20th C, that is a TD. But your argument I think is correct. The NFL doesnt call that a catch any more.

He didn't have two feet down before he entered the end zone, though.