Jump to content

Divisional Round


peasy23
 Share

Recommended Posts

Laser focus on the receiver and totally oblivious to the blitzing DB straight in front of him

Tannehill has outperformed what I expected of him this season but he's still nothing more than a bang ordinary QB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Boo Khaki said:

There's a four inch long furrow in the turf where the nose of the ball had been dragged across it. Call should be overturned

The ball touching the ground isn't enough to overturn it, though.

Had that been ruled incomplete on the field it would have stayed that way too IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Todd_is_God said:

The ball touching the ground isn't enough to overturn it, though.

Had that been ruled incomplete on the field it would have stayed that way too IMO.

It is if the ground has clearly helped establish possession. 

Different if it's merely a touch of the turf, but the fact there's a four inch long mark shows that it wouldn't have been caught without the ground helping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mrpaddyx said:

Have they changed the rules so the ball can hit the ground before catching it? Should have been called incomplete.

No, it's just complicated and nuanced. Merely touching the ground has never been a determining factor, it depends on whether or not the possession is established regardless of the ball touching the turf. Generally if it's just a touch where contact is simultaneous with the catch and the ball doesn't move, then you'll get away with it. It's different when you 'trap' the ball because then the ground is considered to have helped establish the catch, which is what I think has happened here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

No, it's just complicated and nuanced. Merely touching the ground has never been a determining factor, it depends on whether or not the possession is established regardless of the ball touching the turf. Generally if it's just a touch where contact is simultaneous with the catch and the ball doesn't move, then you'll get away with it. It's different when you 'trap' the ball because then the ground is considered to have helped establish the catch, which is what I think has happened here.

In that case, and I confess I didn't fully understand the rules, I can see why they stuck with the onfield call. He is clearly catching that ball regardless, the ground doesn't help him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...