Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 2 of 5 <2345
Username Post: Eagles        (Topic#22422)
10Q 
Professor
Posts: 23199

Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
01-07-19 12:53 PM - Post#271648    
    In response to palestra38

Because review showed it was a completion (in my opinion).



 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
01-07-19 01:06 PM - Post#271650    
    In response to 10Q

I think if the catch is being contested, you must hold it to the ground. The change in the rule was not for the reason of dealing with contested catches, but uncontested ones, in which a "football move" was taken after clear possession. Had he caught it, taken a few steps and then got hit to the ground, that would be a fumble under the new rule. I think the NFL doesn't know what the rule is.

 
Quakers03 
Professor
Posts: 12480

Reg: 12-07-04
01-07-19 01:20 PM - Post#271652    
    In response to palestra38

The announcers, as per usual, did a poor job on that one. At no point did they even mention the fact, that as Palestra notes, the ball was indeed moving a bit as the defender had his hand in there. Collinsworth really seems to struggle in this department. The fact that it took them 3 quarters to even mention that the Bears still hadn't received a penalty was also poor production.

 
10Q 
Professor
Posts: 23199

Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
01-07-19 01:25 PM - Post#271655    
    In response to Quakers03

I thought they got it right. The ball moving a tiny bit is not enough to invalidate a catch. He had control for 3 or more steps. That's a catch in my book.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
01-07-19 01:46 PM - Post#271661    
    In response to palestra38

The former head of referees who has 2 super bowls and 14 years as an NFL official was in the booth and said it should have been ruled a catch and Bears ball at the spot of the unrecovered fumble. If he wasn't sure, I don't see how you, me or anyone can claim complete clarity on the issue.

It's a crazy situation for sure. I was shocked that no one went after the ball. Every player is taught to go after every ball on the ground, whistle or not.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
01-07-19 01:48 PM - Post#271662    
    In response to PennFan10

And everyone, officials, announcers, experts, everyone, agrees it was indeed a legitimate catch and fumble.

The question is what to do with an unrecovered, legit fumble.

 
13otto 
Masters Student
Posts: 779
13otto
Loc: Philadelphia, PA
Reg: 11-22-04
Eagles
01-07-19 02:00 PM - Post#271667    
    In response to 10Q

  • 10Q Said:
I don't get the rule on that play where the Bear completion was made, but because no one picked up the ball after the whistle blew, it was ruled an incompletion. That is a very dumb rule. Once the whistle blew, the play is over. He caught the ball. It's a catch. Might have cost the Bears the game.


Yes, once the referee blew the whistle, the play was ruled incomplete and was over. Had the referee ruled it complete, he would not have blown his whistle and the Eagles likely would have recovered, meaning the Bears would not have scored. Since the play was blown dead, and there was no clear recovery, the rule states that the call could not have been reversed. His blowing the whistle for an incomplete pass likely cost the Eagles 3 points, as they likely recover the fumble. But you cannot reward the Bears by reversing the call and giving the Bears possession inside the 10 when the referee is clearly blowing his whistle and waving his arms, standing right in front of the football. I'd have thrown something through my TV had that happened.
http://www.letsgoquakers.com/


Edited by 13otto on 01-07-19 02:03 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
Eagles
01-07-19 02:14 PM - Post#271670    
    In response to PennFan10

I love your passion about things, but you have this habit of making uncompromising categorical statements that simply overstate the position. From the Athletic:

" There were several bizarre moments in this game, but the strangest occurred late in the first half when it appeared that LeBlanc broke up a 30-yard pass intended for Anthony Miller. LeBlanc did a great job of playing through Miller’s hands to jar the ball loose. But the officials reviewed the call and determined that Miller actually had control and it was a catch. The only problem? Nobody recovered the fumble.

Because it was ruled an incompletion, the ball just sat on the ground, and everybody got ready for the next play. There seemed to be a lot of confusion during the review. At one point, the defensive players moved down toward the end zone, indicating that they thought the play was going to be ruled a catch and Bears’ ball. Then they walked back to the original line of scrimmage. ESPN’s Kevin Seifert did a good job of finding the rule clarification: “If there is no video evidence of a clear recovery or the ball going out of bounds, the ruling of incomplete stands.” So the officials deemed that it was a catch, but they initially ruled it incomplete. Since there was no clear recovery, the call of incomplete stood. The explanation at the time of the call was bad. And the rule is weird. But the officials actually did get it correct in the end."


So (1)--at least this writer (and the ref and many other observers) thought the play was contested and properly ruled an incompletion and (2) ultimately, they got the right call.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
01-07-19 02:27 PM - Post#271676    
    In response to palestra38

Let's not get into bad habits on here or this thread will get hopelessly off topic.

I agree with the analysis above so lets separate the issues.

1. what was actually called on the field
2. what did the replay indicate
3. what is the application of the rules based on what happened.

what was called on the field is an incompletion and the the application of the rules was, in the end and after much confusion, appropriate. What I stated, and I think is still true, is that the replay shows it was a catch and a fumble. My original post was to argue your point that you didn't think it was actually a catch (based on point 2, replay). I assume you think that because of 1 and 3 (the play by play will go down as an incomplete pass).

My point on everyone agreeing, is simply that I haven't seen anyone who argues, based on replay, that was not a catch.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
01-07-19 02:32 PM - Post#271677    
    In response to PennFan10


Guess I don't count---and that article suggests that the author agrees with me. The point is that it was a contested play right to the ground, with the two players fighting for the ball. I don't see how you call that a catch when it comes loose upon hitting the ground. If there was a moment in which the receiver had possession with no defender on the ball or hands, I would agree with you, but that is not what the replay showed. Again, we see time and time situations where, even in the end zone, a player hits the ball free after the receiver has two hands on it. That is inconsistent with this call.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
01-07-19 02:37 PM - Post#271680    
    In response to palestra38

You definitely count. I should have clarified that "prior to your contention..."

The article indicates "incomplete pass" was the right call based on 1 and 3. He never mentions what the replay showed.

And you and I don't count when a 14 year NFL official and a HOF WR both say its an undisputed catch.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
01-07-19 02:39 PM - Post#271681    
    In response to PennFan10

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/257001 80/strang...

Look at that again (and I acknowledge that the author of this article thought it was a catch). The defender has his hand on the ball from the time it comes down to the time they hit the ground and it goes free. Sorry, but if that is a catch, then they get this same call wrong 99% of the time. When two players are fighting for the ball, someone has to come down with undisputed possession before it goes free.

 
Quakers03 
Professor
Posts: 12480

Reg: 12-07-04
Eagles
01-07-19 02:52 PM - Post#271686    
    In response to PennFan10

How did that same WR do on calls during last years super bowl? He's no more qualified than either of us. Go watch it again. The ball was still moving, if ever so slightly, as they both made a play for it. Do I think ultimately it should have been a catch? Probably, but that ball was contested and like normal, Collinsworth whiffed on talking about it.

 
13otto 
Masters Student
Posts: 779
13otto
Loc: Philadelphia, PA
Reg: 11-22-04
01-07-19 03:15 PM - Post#271694    
    In response to Quakers03

The referee's clarification indicated that the review would have overturned the call to a completed pass and fumble, had there been a clear recovery. But since there was no clear recovery, the call of incomplete stood. The rule apparently is very clear on this precise scenario.
http://www.letsgoquakers.com/


 
jeromelh 
Junior
Posts: 202

Age: 81
Reg: 03-30-17
01-07-19 03:24 PM - Post#271696    
    In response to 13otto

HI Guys!!

The refs made absolutely made the correct call. The rule book actually addresses this. If the pass is called incomplete on the field and the ball is not recovered (the ref picked it up), then the ruling on the field stands and cannot be reviewed. It does not matter whether it was actually a catch or not.

Case closed

 
10Q 
Professor
Posts: 23199

Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
01-07-19 03:24 PM - Post#271697    
    In response to 13otto

Yes. It's a bad rule.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
01-07-19 03:54 PM - Post#271701    
    In response to 10Q

Well the fact that a recovered ball would have resulted in a catch and fumble ruling tells you the officials all knew based on replay it was actually a catch and a bad rule led to the ruling.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
01-07-19 05:00 PM - Post#271715    
    In response to PennFan10

Interestingly, the NFL changed the last miss by the Bears to a blocked kick today.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 4466

Reg: 11-22-04
01-07-19 05:12 PM - Post#271718    
    In response to PennFan10

it's very interesting to me how many perspectives there are on this play.

There are people watching the same thing everyone else did and concluding this might not be a catch. There are people concluding it was a catch but "obviously" the rule was correctly interpreted, and the rule makes a ton of sense. There are people concluding that it was a catch, the rule was correctly interpreted, and it's a dumb rule. Does that cover it?



 
13otto 
Masters Student
Posts: 779
13otto
Loc: Philadelphia, PA
Reg: 11-22-04
01-07-19 05:18 PM - Post#271720    
    In response to PennFan10

  • PennFan10 Said:
Well the fact that a recovered ball would have resulted in a catch and fumble ruling tells you the officials all knew based on replay it was actually a catch and a bad rule led to the ruling.


Agreed on the first part that the officials knew it was a catch and fumble. But it wasn't a "bad rule" that led to the ruling, but rather a "bad call" (incompletion) that led to the ruling. The referee blew his whistle, ruled it incomplete and stood over the football waiving his arms so the defense could not recover it. Once de did that, awarding the football to the offense at the spot the ball rolled dead would be an awful decision. That would be a "bad rule" and the rule absolutely should not be changed to that.

Had the ball rolled out of bounds, you could have given possession to the offense at that point. Had it rolled out of the end zone, you could have given the ball to the defense and called it a touch back. But to reward the offense for a great defensive play and a referee's incorrect call would be a "bad rule".
http://www.letsgoquakers.com/


 
 Page 2 of 5 <2345
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

2870 Views





Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved.
Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution.
FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.197 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 12:45 AM
Top