Official San Diego Chargers @ Denver Broncos Game Thread 11.18.2012

[BroncoFox]

Originally Posted by Drunken.Broncoholic

Ya but they are saying the catch was already made. I'm not sure but I think he caught it at like the 3 held onto it with just one hand. By the 1 they already established the catch, not sure how many times he stepped on the ground. Thus making it only have to cross the plane of the line

I see what you are saying. I thought he didn't quite have it, but they reviewed it.. and so be it. No biggie.. we still won.

I thought this was a huge win. The Chargers KNEW they had to win. And we didn't let them. In the past, they would have won. Today, they didn't. This is a completely different Bronco team.

[Drunken.Broncoholic]

Originally Posted by BroncoFox

I see what you are saying. I thought he didn't quite have it, but they reviewed it.. and so be it. No biggie.. we still won.

I thought this was a huge win. The Chargers KNEW they had to win. And we didn't let them. In the past, they would have won. Today, they didn't. This is a completely different Bronco team.

Ya big win. Had it the 2nd hardest before ravens

[That One Guy]

Originally Posted by Action

And no, there would be NO controversy in regards to that catch touch down... do you know how many times a WR catches it and stretches in for the end zone with one hand, crosses the plane, and gets the ball knocked out or loses it?

What part are you so confused about?

He had 2 feet down and had full control...

Anytime you cross the goal line with possession the PLAY IS OVER.

Wow, must you be so condescending? You sound like a real dick.

[Vine]

Originally Posted by Action

The rule is pretty damn clear...

He had possession when he got two feet down and leaped for the goal line...

There is nothing confusing about that play at all.

You guys seem to want to be confused because he wasn't wearing a Broncos jersey.

I am not disputing the possession when he crossed the goalline. I want to see where at in the rulebook where it says that possession of the ball as a receiver crosses the goaline trumps the NFL catch rule.

[Action]

Originally Posted by That One Guy

Wow, must you be so condescending? You sound like a real dick.

Explaining in straight forward the 1st time didn't really get the point across.

I mean let's be honest, this crossing goal line with possession = touchdown/play dead gets discussed how many times a year and people are still confused?

People who watch football, every year.

[Vine]

Originally Posted by BroncoFox

I still don't see it. I've seen balls caught with 2 feet in, and then the player out of bounds, drops the ball, or it hits the ground, and it's ruled incomplete. In a running play, yes.. as soon as you leap ahead and the ball crosses the plane, it's over. But in a catch, you must finish the catch. It doesn't matter if it's in the endzone or not.

So.. I don't agree with it. Didn't matter in the end, but I still think that was not a touchdown.

This.

[Action]

Originally Posted by Vine

I am not disputing the possession when he crossed the goalline. I want to see where at in the rulebook where it says that possession of the ball as a receiver crosses the goaline trumps the NFL catch rule.

There's no where that needs to be said, because once the ball crosses the goal line with possession the play is dead.

If they needed to specify it, they'd specify it under a special circumstance when the ball crosses the goal line...but there is NOT...

Ball crosses goal line with possession = play over.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Boltjolt

Its only a controversy in here. It was a clear TD and i thought so when i saw the replay when he held the ball over the line before he went down.
The rule ONLY applies when there is a catch IN THE EZ.

You guys wont this game right? Whats the problem?

No one really cares about the TD. People are just arguing to argue. And despite what you and Action think, the rules are not that clear on the matter.

[Vine]

Originally Posted by Action

And no, there would be NO controversy in regards to that catch touch down... do you know how many times a WR catches it and stretches in for the end zone with one hand, crosses the plane, and gets the ball knocked out or loses it?

What part are you so confused about?

He had 2 feet down and had full control...

Anytime you cross the goal line with possession the PLAY IS OVER.

In situations bolded above, receivers catch the ball, take several steps (football moves) toward the endzone, and the process of making the catch becomes official long before the receiver stretches the ball across the plain of the goal line.

[Action]

Once again,

HE HAD POSSESSION OF THE BALL AND CROSSED THE GOAL LINE = PLAY OVER.

The only thing you can be arguing is if he had possession, which he clearly did...

So there is no controversy here.

[BroncoFox]

All I know is that I've seen a pass that was caught in the endzone, two feet in, and when the receiver hit the ground outside of the endzone, the ball came out, and it was ruled incomplete. That's all I am basing that on. They need to be consistent if that is how they are going to call it.

[spiralism]

ahh who cares, we won anyways

[Vine]

Originally Posted by That One Guy

This exact call was made last year and the NFL came back to say it was called incorrectly and the extending of a ball does not constitute a catch. It'll be interesting to see if an official comment is released.

I think defining a catch may be one of the most pressing issues for the NFL to date. What he did was clearly a catch but by NFL rules, it probably shouldn't have been. They're currently defying logic in the way they're defining them.

Thank you. Someone else actually exists that at least recognizes that the NFL catch rule is one that needs to be addressed, revised, clarified, etc. Perhaps even changed, especially for catches in the endzone.

[Action]

You guys can't be this....

Oh wait, I'm on the omane.

Let me also add that he got two feet down and his KNEE was down before the ball came out, so the play is dead regardless.

Anyone questioning that play is just blind.

The end.

[Action]

Originally Posted by Vine

Thank you. Someone else actually exists that at least recognizes that the NFL catch rule is one that needs to be addressed, revised, clarified, etc. Perhaps even changed, especially for catches in the endzone.

This has NOTHING to do with it being a catch rule ---

This has everything to do with POSSESSION + CROSSING GOAL LINE.

If you have possession and you cross the goal line the play is dead.

[Vine]

Originally Posted by Action

There's no where that needs to be said, because once the ball crosses the goal line with possession the play is dead.

If they needed to specify it, they'd specify it under a special circumstance when the ball crosses the goal line...but there is NOT...

Ball crosses goal line with possession = play over.

This is making the assumption that crossing the plain of the goaline for receptions trumps the NFL rule on completing a catch. Finally, why, from a competitive standpoint, should a catch in the endzone be treated differently than a catch that occurs before the endzone. I have not, ever, seen anyone answer the logic of that.

[Bronco X]

Seriously? After a win all that can be discussed is a TD that didn't matter? Get the hell over it. There are things that still matter as it relates to the Broncos.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Action

You guys can't be this....

Oh wait, I'm on the omane.

Let me also add that he got two feet down and his KNEE was down before the ball came out, so the play is dead regardless.

Anyone questioning that play is just blind.

The end.

The only blind person I see is you. The precedence exists to overturn that TD. You can pretend otherwise, and act like your so much smarter than everyone else, but in the end you only make yourself look like a douche and a fool.

The real discussion is about the ambiguity of the rules, not the TD anyway. We won, so whether or not it's a TD doesn't matter. The illogical nature of the NFL rules is what is being discussed here, and while you are so certain of how right you are (to the point of seeemingly missing what's actually being discussed), the rest of us are just trying to figure the **** out.

[Jetland]

Originally Posted by 24champ

When was the last time that was done?

Raiders did it two years ago but did not make the playoffs which ranks as one of the funniest things to ever happen.

[Vine]

Originally Posted by spiralism

ahh who cares, we won anyways

Anyone who is a pure fan of football, who likes to see rules applied evenly and fairly with consistency should care.

[Vine]

Originally Posted by Action

You guys can't be this....

Oh wait, I'm on the omane.

Let me also add that he got two feet down and his KNEE was down before the ball came out, so the play is dead regardless.

Anyone questioning that play is just blind.

The end.

Saying that he got two feet down and a knee does not strengthen your argument when you consider what all Calvin Johnson did on his disallowed td catch.

[Vine]

Originally Posted by Bronco X

Seriously? After a win all that can be discussed is a TD that didn't matter? Get the hell over it. There are things that still matter as it relates to the Broncos.

This discussion no longer has to do with the Broncos, it has to do with judging football rules and the interpretation of rules. If you don't like the discussion, you don't have to participate.

[24champ]

Originally Posted by Jetland

Raiders did it two years ago but did not make the playoffs which ranks as one of the funniest things to ever happen.

I should have clarified, when was the last time the Broncos swept the division? 1998-99?

[Jetland]

Originally Posted by 24champ

I should have clarified, when was the last time the Broncos swept the division? 1998-99?

sorry got excited about saying bad things about the silver and black....hehe

[Vine]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

The only blind person I see is you. The precedence exists to overturn that TD. You can pretend otherwise, and act like your so much smarter than everyone else, but in the end you only make yourself look like a douche and a fool.

The real discussion is about the ambiguity of the rules, not the TD anyway. We won, so whether or not it's a TD doesn't matter. The illogical nature of the NFL rules is what is being discussed here, and while you are so certain of how right you are (to the point of seeemingly missing what's actually being discussed), the rest of us are just trying to figure the **** out.

Yes. This. If the NFL wants to avoid any huge controversies in the future, they should seriously think about clarifying the rule in this situation. It is not like it's a rare situation, and it's only a matter of time when some situation like this will decide a game, perhaps even a postseason game.