Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers v Titans Game Thread: Thursday Night Football Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Magooch" data-source="post: 980160" data-attributes="member: 17987"><p>I must admit the "maintain control to the ground" at least as it relates to the end zone has never made a lot of sense to me. If a runner dives for the pylon, stretches out his arm and the tip of the ball touches the pylon, it's done. Touchdown, play is dead and finished the instant the ball touches the pylon ("breaks the plane"). Whatever happens after that is completely meaningless as to whether it's a touchdown or not. It seems to me like receptions into (or entering) the end zone should be treated the same way. As soon as a player possesses the ball the play is dead and it's over. Catch the ball and as soon as you have two feet down in the end zone it's done. They have muddied the waters a bit with the "football move" requirement but even that's largely inconsistent as a sideline catch where the player catches the ball, taps his toes, and immediately falls out of bounds would seem to only meet the most broad "football move" requirements but it's universally accepted as a clean catch. </p><p></p><p>So it's just a mess. By the NFL's own precedent I can say with confidence if that ball had came out of Hooper's hands and hit the ground it would have 100% been ruled an incompletion, written off as "didn't maintain control to the ground" as we've seen before. Ironically, it really seems to be the case that Ford winding up with the ball is what made it ruled a catch and TD, whereas if he'd simply batted it and it wound up hitting the ground it probably would've been called incomplete. </p><p></p><p>In whatever case 99% of the time I think it's one of those "spirit of the law" vs "letter of the law" cases. Just about every catch that has been overturned for "did not maintain control to the ground" is one that I see and my gut immediately says "That's a catch". And until the NFL made its standard in the "Dez Caught It" incident (or at least publicized it widely) I think that was the case for most people. It feels like they've tried to write in legislation to address every possible circumstance with the intention of removing doubt but in doing so have sown far more doubt and confusion than they've ever cleared up.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Magooch, post: 980160, member: 17987"] I must admit the "maintain control to the ground" at least as it relates to the end zone has never made a lot of sense to me. If a runner dives for the pylon, stretches out his arm and the tip of the ball touches the pylon, it's done. Touchdown, play is dead and finished the instant the ball touches the pylon ("breaks the plane"). Whatever happens after that is completely meaningless as to whether it's a touchdown or not. It seems to me like receptions into (or entering) the end zone should be treated the same way. As soon as a player possesses the ball the play is dead and it's over. Catch the ball and as soon as you have two feet down in the end zone it's done. They have muddied the waters a bit with the "football move" requirement but even that's largely inconsistent as a sideline catch where the player catches the ball, taps his toes, and immediately falls out of bounds would seem to only meet the most broad "football move" requirements but it's universally accepted as a clean catch. So it's just a mess. By the NFL's own precedent I can say with confidence if that ball had came out of Hooper's hands and hit the ground it would have 100% been ruled an incompletion, written off as "didn't maintain control to the ground" as we've seen before. Ironically, it really seems to be the case that Ford winding up with the ball is what made it ruled a catch and TD, whereas if he'd simply batted it and it wound up hitting the ground it probably would've been called incomplete. In whatever case 99% of the time I think it's one of those "spirit of the law" vs "letter of the law" cases. Just about every catch that has been overturned for "did not maintain control to the ground" is one that I see and my gut immediately says "That's a catch". And until the NFL made its standard in the "Dez Caught It" incident (or at least publicized it widely) I think that was the case for most people. It feels like they've tried to write in legislation to address every possible circumstance with the intention of removing doubt but in doing so have sown far more doubt and confusion than they've ever cleared up. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Firethorn1001
Azpackfan4
XPack
Latest posts
2024 1st Rd pick #25 Jorden Morgan OL
Latest: milani
32 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
I had This Nightmare
Latest: Thirteen Below
Today at 3:13 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
U
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: U.P. Packfan
Today at 1:31 AM
Draft Talk
2024 Draft-- Media Stuff
Latest: Poppa San
Yesterday at 11:23 PM
Draft Talk
F
Dark Horse Candidates
Latest: Firethorn1001
Yesterday at 10:39 PM
Draft Talk
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers v Titans Game Thread: Thursday Night Football Edition
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top