Jump to content

2014-2015 NFL Football thread


Recommended Posts

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Jan 11, 2015 -> 02:57 PM)
That's a legit catch by Bryant.

 

Yup. I thought he had his hand under it the whole time. Hand hit the ground, part of the ball might have hit the ground too, but when it popped back up, he caught it again. I don't think there was enough evidence to overturn.

Edited by chw42
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 8.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't know how you can call that one a 'Stupid rule". The ball hit against the ground and bounced out of the grip in his hand. That one actually looks quite clear to me and I don't think there's any interpretation that would allow that to be a catch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 11, 2015 -> 03:02 PM)
I don't know how you can call that one a 'Stupid rule". The ball hit against the ground and bounced out of the grip in his hand. That one actually looks quite clear to me and I don't think there's any interpretation that would allow that to be a catch.

 

From the time he caught it, he took 3 steps and reached for the end zone. IMO that should be enough control to call it a catch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 11, 2015 -> 02:58 PM)
No it isn't there's one shot where you can see the ball move loose upwards as a consequence of hitting the ground. Overturn was correct.

His hand was under the ball when both his hand and the ball hit the ground and he quickly recovered it. Not enough to overturn the original call, refs affected the result of this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 11, 2015 -> 04:04 PM)
From the time he caught it, he took 3 steps and reached for the end zone. IMO that should be enough control to call it a catch.

 

 

 

he was on his way to the ground the entire time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (zenryan @ Jan 11, 2015 -> 03:07 PM)
he was on his way to the ground the entire time.

 

I know, wasn't arguing the call, just the rule. Even though he was falling to the ground, I think he showed enough control that the catch should count, just like the Megatron catch vs the Bears. Obviously the current rule says differently

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Jan 11, 2015 -> 04:05 PM)
His hand was under the ball when both his hand and the ball hit the ground and he quickly recovered it. Not enough to overturn the original call, refs affected the result of this game.

 

 

the ball popped up in the air and he re-caught it on his back.

 

 

and if he "quickly recovered it" then that means at one point he lost the ball.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (zenryan @ Jan 11, 2015 -> 04:13 PM)
the ball popped up in the air and he re-caught it on his back.

 

 

and if he "quickly recovered it" then that means at one point he lost the ball.

If it hit his body or the defender and he "quickly recovered it" that would have been a catch, but you can't hit the ground and then recover the ball on a catch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (daa84 @ Jan 11, 2015 -> 04:18 PM)
Throw out the rules. Watch the reply and ask yourself, did he catch that ball? You are lying if you say no. The call was correct, cuz it's a dumb rule

Once I saw that ball pop up after hitting the ground I said no. The ground jarred it loose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All Dez had to do was catch he ball. He did not need to stretch for a TD. In stretching for a TD, the ball was jarred loose by the ground. Good call.

 

I'll add that I was rooting for Dallas, but Dez routinely acts like an idiot, so I'm not surprised he isn't smart enough to know that the situation called for a catch, not a TD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...