Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Decker catch ruled not a touchdown

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Decker catch ruled not a touchdown

    On the play the other night where Decker caught the ball, hit the pylon, then fumbled.....what did we end up doing on that possession? Cause when I watched it live I thought the ref got the call right (even though I disagree with the rule). But they just went over it on NFL network and even though they said the call was right I don't think it was. His second foot hit inbounds, then he reached the ball and broke the plane BEFORE he hit the pylon, went to the ground, and fumbled the ball. I believe since he got two feet in and broke the plane the play is dead at that point and the rest doesn't matter. But I can't remember what we ended up doing on that drive.
    Last edited by LetsGoBroncos; 10-23-2013, 12:06 PM.

  • #2
    FG

    Comment


    • #3

      Comment


      • #4
        Ive actually been thinking about this play a lot. I remember in another game Orange Julius had a similar play where he caught the ball, turned, took a step or two and jumped with the ball crossing the goal line. Although the ball came loose it was still ruled a touchdown.

        My understanding is that you only have to mantain control through the ground if you are in the act of catching the ball. Decker caught the ball took a step, turned around and dove. It seems to me that he completed the act of the catch, made a football move (turning him into a runner) and crossed the goal line with the football.

        I think we should have challenged it. Although it was a terribly officated game on both sides, so who knows.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by LetsGoBroncos View Post
          On the play the other night where Decker caught the ball, hit the pylon, then fumbled.....what did we end up doing on that possession? Cause when I watched it live I thought the ref got the call right (even though I disagree with the rule). But they just went over it on NFL network and even though they said the call was right I don't think it was. His second foot hit inbounds, then he reached the ball and broke the plane BEFORE he hit the pylon, went to the ground, and fumbled the ball. I believe since he got two feet in and broke the plane the play is dead at that point and the rest doesn't matter. But I can't remember what we ended up doing on that drive.

          Even if he breaks the plane...(which he did) he would still have to demonstrate possession of the football throughout the catch. 4 years ago, that is a TD. Calvin Johnson had a TD overruled because he did not maintain the catch all the way through.


          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Archer81 View Post
            Even if he breaks the plane...(which he did) he would still have to demonstrate possession of the football throughout the catch. 4 years ago, that is a TD. Calvin Johnson had a TD overruled because he did not maintain the catch all the way through.


            I thought once you have possession and make a football move you become a runner and as soon as the ball crosses the goal line its 6.

            Comment


            • #7
              The fact remains that the NFL has totally f'ed all this up with stupid damn rules. I long for the good old days of 2 feet with control of the ball equals a catch. This bs of continuing on thru infinity and beyond and making "football' moves and the other garbage jargon is evidence the game is being ruined.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by myMind View Post
                I thought once you have possession and make a football move you become a runner and as soon as the ball crosses the goal line its 6.

                Consider the play. Decker caught it going out of bounds. Before a few years ago, demonstrating the football move and hitting the pylon = 6 points. Now, Decker would have to do all of that, and hang on to the ball. He did not hang on to it after hitting the ground. You have to display control of the football through out the entire action of catching the ball, making the "football" move and going to the ground.


                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Archer81 View Post
                  Consider the play. Decker caught it going out of bounds. Before a few years ago, demonstrating the football move and hitting the pylon = 6 points. Now, Decker would have to do all of that, and hang on to the ball. He did not hang on to it after hitting the ground. You have to display control of the football through out the entire action of catching the ball, making the "football" move and going to the ground.


                  Ill have to watch it again. What defines controlling the ball? Bringing it into the body? Because Decker had control with two hands, turned and lunged. Seems like a football move to me.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by myMind View Post
                    Ill have to watch it again. What defines controlling the ball? Bringing it into the body? Because Decker had control with to hands, turned and lunged. Seems like a football move to me.

                    It is a football move. After he hit the ground and rolled, the ball came loose, so according to the refs, it was not a catch. In NFL 2010, the 2 feet inbounds, the hitting the pylon = a touchdown. In 2013, the 2 feet inbounds, hitting the pylon = not a catch because Decker did not maintain possession of the football.

                    It's a stupid ****ing rule. The ball can touch the ground if a receiver has his hands on it...as long as the ball does not move around.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Archer81 View Post
                      It is a football move. After he hit the ground and rolled, the ball came loose, so according to the refs, it was not a catch. In NFL 2010, the 2 feet inbounds, the hitting the pylon = a touchdown. In 2013, the 2 feet inbounds, hitting the pylon = not a catch because Decker did not maintain possession of the football.

                      It's a stupid ****ing rule. The ball can touch the ground if a receiver has his hands on it...as long as the ball does not move around.

                      That is only in the act of catching the ball. Orange Julius had a similar play in an earlier game that was upheld as a TD. The gray area is when does a receiver go from being in the act of catching the ball to being a runner. As I said Ill have to watch it again, but if Decker had the ball in his hands, took a step while turning and dove, I consider that a football move after a completed catch. Water under the bridge I guess.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by myMind View Post
                        Ive actually been thinking about this play a lot. I remember in another game Orange Julius had a similar play where he caught the ball, turned, took a step or two and jumped with the ball crossing the goal line. Although the ball came loose it was still ruled a touchdown.

                        My understanding is that you only have to mantain control through the ground if you are in the act of catching the ball. Decker caught the ball took a step, turned around and dove. It seems to me that he completed the act of the catch, made a football move (turning him into a runner) and crossed the goal line with the football.

                        I think we should have challenged it. Although it was a terribly officated game on both sides, so who knows.
                        It was the Giants game, and yeah I saw an explanation then that justified the Thomas TD, I would've thought the same would apply.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Decker always tries that crap when he is falling out of bounds near the pylon. I don't think he's converted a single one into a TD

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by myMind View Post
                            Ill have to watch it again. What defines controlling the ball? Bringing it into the body? Because Decker had control with two hands, turned and lunged. Seems like a football move to me.
                            "To me" being the key words.

                            The football move part is what's up for an individual's (Ref's) interpretation.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              here's the problem with the challenge: you don't get to argue legalese with the ref under the hood. You would be relying on him making the determination that his buddy was so obviously wrong that an injustice must be reversed based on conclusive evidence.

                              Not a great chance of winning, and it would cost a time-out, heading into crunch time where you obviously will need all the time-outs you can get.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X