“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday. -John Wayne
Del Rio is going absolutely off come press conference time.
That 1st down ruling with the card is gonna be debated for weeks.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I dunno. But the debate will be between a folded card and a single card.
Or paper in this case.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Tyrod is a decent QB and they did him dirty trying to go to Nathan peterman when he was the reason they had a winning record in the first place.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I hate that rule that says that a ball fumbled out of the end zone is a turnover. The ball should be placed at the spot of the fumble, or at the 1 or 2 yard line.
There is no other part of the field that a fumble is treated in that manner.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
Oakland blew it. I hate both teams, but despise the Cowboys.
The Raiders have really underachieved this year IMO. I thought they'd be a Super Bowl contender
"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Jeudy is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Tillman is flanked out wide to the right. Judkins and Ford are split in the backfield as Flacco takes the snap ... Here we go."
I hate that rule that says that a ball fumbled out of the end zone is a turnover. The ball should be placed at the spot of the fumble, or at the 1 or 2 yard line.
There is no other part of the field that a fumble is treated in that manner.
I was thinking the same thing.
What's the rationale behind the rule?
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
that was a catch, and i hate the steelers. they definitely got robbed.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
The call was correct...possibly the rule is not correct. But he went to the ground without the football move being processed and lost control of that ball as there was not a hand underneath it.
The Steelers deserve whatever calls don't go their way...they are still ahead by about 200 calls. Just in the same game...white hat comes to announce. "THERE IS NO FLAG FOR LINEMAN DOWN FIELD" Well if there is no flag...why was it thrown. It was a RPO...and at least 2 OL were well pass the 2 yards grace area when the pass was thrown. How do you throw a flag for seeing it then say there is no flag
Steelers get so many calls it ain't funny. Like I'm going to feel sorry for them...lol but as I said it was the correct call. Possibly not a correct rule!
jmho
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off! Go Browns! CHRIST HAS RISEN! GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
Mom, I think it was a catch. The NFL needs to change the rule back to what it was. Hell, no one really knows what a catch is anymore.
See, I like the current rule. A receiver or defender should have control of the ball throughout the catching process, especially if he's falling to the ground.
Don't bobble the ball while going to the ground, unless you've already established yourself as a runner.
No rule will work for every scenario, but I think this works best.
“...Iguodala to Curry, back to Iguodala, up for the layup! Oh! Blocked by James! LeBron James with the rejection!”
I hate that rule that says that a ball fumbled out of the end zone is a turnover. The ball should be placed at the spot of the fumble, or at the 1 or 2 yard line.
There is no other part of the field that a fumble is treated in that manner.
I was thinking the same thing.
What's the rationale behind the rule?
The rule has been around forever, not sure what the intention was though.
To me, the rule says it's too risky to attempt a lunging, outstretched TD at the pillion. Right? So that means the NFL has a rule against a fantastic athletic play.
In the situation last night, the NFL or the rule suggests Carr should have just covered up and run out at the 3. Do we want that? Shouldn't we want to see a diving play?
I think the offense should retain possession but maybe there is a penalty. Maybe 10 yards and loss of down.
I saw it mentioned that it be treated like a safety free kick for the defense, which I kind of liked. In last night's situation, Dallas would punt back to Oakland but no points were awarded. I figure a team might intentionally fumble the ball into the endzone on 4th down to get more chances to score, but how would they fumble the ball out of bounds on purpose without making it look like a pass? That's awfully risky and almost impossible to do.
Ultimately, the defense should recover the ball to be awarded possession. That's just my take.
“...Iguodala to Curry, back to Iguodala, up for the layup! Oh! Blocked by James! LeBron James with the rejection!”
Figuring what is and isn't a catch has been a problem for NFL officials for several years now. By Adam Stites Updated Nov 22, 2015, 2:37pm EST
The 2015 season has been defined by the NFL's controversial rule for determining whether a catch was made and there have already been several calls cast into the spotlight. It's certainly not a new issue and was really cast into the spotlight in 2010 when a would-be touchdown reception for Calvin Johnson of the Detroit Lions was overturned and ruled incomplete.
Since then, big moments like Dallas Cowboys wide receiver Dez Bryant in the 2014 postseason against the Green Bay Packers, have caused many to call for a change to a confusing rule. And it has been changed, but never substantially.
Prior to the 2015 season, the rule was clarified to remove the words "football move" from the catch rule, but it was a matter of semantics that didn't change much about the actual content of the rule. Here's how the NFL clarified the catch rule in March 2015:
In order to complete a catch, a receiver must clearly become a runner. He does that by gaining control of the ball, touching both feet down and then, after the second foot is down, having the ball long enough to clearly become a runner, which is defined as the ability to ward off or protect himself from impending contact. If, before becoming a runner, a receiver falls to the ground in an attempt to make a catch, he must maintain control of the ball after contacting the ground. If he loses control of the ball after contacting the ground and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. Reaching the ball out before becoming a runner will not trump the requirement to hold onto the ball when you land. When you are attempting to complete a catch, you must put the ball away or protect the ball so it does not come loose.
And here's the official page in the rule book, Rule 8 Section 1.
It's a rule that impacts games on what seems like a weekly basis:
Calvin Johnson still doesn't understand the Calvin Johnson rule, and he's not alone. ... Johnson got two feet down and appeared to control the ball as it broke the plane of the goal line, but upon further review, it was determined that he did not maintain control all the way, and the catch was ruled incomplete.Sep 8, 2013
In order to complete a catch, a receiver must clearly become a runner. He does that by gaining control of the ball, touching both feet down and then, after the second foot is down, having the ball long enough to clearly become a runner, which is defined as the ability to ward off or protect himself from impending contact. If, before becoming a runner, a receiver falls to the ground in an attempt to make a catch, he must maintain control of the ball after contacting the ground. If he loses control of the ball after contacting the ground and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. Reaching the ball out before becoming a runner will not trump the requirement to hold onto the ball when you land. When you are attempting to complete a catch, you must put the ball away or protect the ball so it does not come loose.
I know that's wordy, but I'm not confused and I certainly wouldn't call it "dumb".
“...Iguodala to Curry, back to Iguodala, up for the layup! Oh! Blocked by James! LeBron James with the rejection!”
It's sad that we have technology ruining sports. Think about this - Widely accepted for 100+ years (and fine with me) was the "in the neighborhood" rule at second base when turning a double play... Now, if you have a baserunner who's pinky was not on the bag for 1/100 of a second when getting up after a slide - he's out. Catches are not catches anymore in the NFL because analyzing them has turned "sport" into a science experiment.
The NFL needs to address this in totality this offseason, can't have different rules for different situations. I say if you break the plane with control - it's a TD at that very instant. If you make a catch in the endzone, a TD is establish the moment two feet (or however many "body parts") land. A WR shouldn't have to catch a ball, take a knee, run to the sideline, gift wrap the football and hand it to an official before he's awarded a TD.
Whoever #29 is for the bucs, Julio Jones just ran his ass over.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
To me if the guy still has the ball in his hands when the play is ruled dead then it should be a catch, I don't care if it moved a little when the player hit the ground.
To me if the guy still has the ball in his hands when the play is ruled dead then it should be a catch, I don't care if it moved a little when the player hit the ground.
How do you legislate common sense?
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers...Socrates
To me if the guy still has the ball in his hands when the play is ruled dead then it should be a catch, I don't care if it moved a little when the player hit the ground.
The rule sucks. It's way too complicated. Who cares if the ball moves? He either caught it or didn't. It's another dumb ass NFL rule that slows down the game [and it's already too slow,] takes away spectacular plays, and creates needless controversy.
If the guy has total control of the ball but it moves when he hits the ground how did the ground assist him with the catch? It used to be that the ground couldn't cause a fumble but apparently it can turn a catch into an incompletion.
I think the key in this rule is that this is all before there is a football move with the ball. Until then its still part of the catch "PROCESS" and if (NOT IF THE BALL MOVES) but if the player does not maintain Control throughout the catch and it hits the ground.
I've seen the rule as a completed pass even if it hits the ground but the player maintained control of the ball throughout so it was a catch.
I'm getting use to the rule I guess.
But if you remember before the rule. Guys were scoring touchdowns and hardly even catching the ball.
Besides it happened to the Steelers so what could be better...lol
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off! Go Browns! CHRIST HAS RISEN! GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
If the guy has total control of the ball but it moves when he hits the ground how did the ground assist him with the catch? It used to be that the ground couldn't cause a fumble but apparently it can turn a catch into an incompletion.
For it to be a catch, the ball can't hit the ground. That has always been the case. If the guy takes 4 steps, falls, and then the ball moves when it hits the ground, it's obviously a catch. If in the process of making the catch the player falls and the ball moves when it hits the ground, it's not a catch.
If a player catches a pass and a defensive player knocks the ball out after a few steps, it's a fumble after a catch. If the defensive player knocks the ball out in the process of the catch, it's incomplete. Same concept with the ground.
Ok lets take the Pittsburgh/New England game. I don't know if you saw it but Pitt TE Jesse James caught the ball but when he caught it he dove for the end zone and the ball moved in his hands when he hit the ground they called it a catch then reviewed it and saw that it moved in his hands and called it incomplete. Now if he hadn't dove for the end zone and just went down where he caught it the Steelers would have had the ball at the half yard line and probably would have scored a TD and won the game instead they lost all because James tried to score and the ball moved when he doved hands first for the end zone. If he hadn't dove it would have been a catch but because he was trying to score, which is the intent of the game, it was incomplete because the ball moved after his hands hit the ground.
but as I said it was the correct call. Possibly not a correct rule!
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Punchsmack/punch.gif)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/hfMNC7T.jpg)