Lions fan respectfully disagrees with call at end of game

• KnightXC1

  

  The whole rule is incredibly stupid. Anyone who saw it and knows anything about football knows that was a game winning touchdown catch. Both feet down, butt down, other hand down. If this is a rule then I never want to see a running back jump for the goal line, cross the plane, then fumble and have it be ruled a TD. The NFL can't have it both ways and this is an absolute fucking joke of a rule. If this were the Colts, Pats, Steelers, Cowboys, or Saints, the media (mostly ESPN) would be going nuts about this and making a huge story out of it. But because it's the Lions, it has basically been thrown to the way side which pisses me the hell off. The NFL is such a joke with rules now that it's almost not football anymore, you can't hit the QB at all without it being a penalty, you have to go through a special process to catch the ball, and the ground can't cause a fumble on runs but can on passes. Just stupid. Calvin caught the ball, the Lions scored, and the officials terribly interpreted the rule instead of using common sense.
• justincredible

  

  Did you all see the penalty called on Braylon Edwards for the kicker stepping on his head tonight? Another equally absurd rule.
• karen lotz

  

  justincredible;483263 wrote:Did you all see the penalty called on Braylon Edwards for the kicker stepping on his head tonight? Another equally absurd rule.

  What? Edwards' helmet could have severely injured the soccer cleats on the kicker's foot. I expect a fine and possible suspension for Edwards. BUSH league move.
• ironman02

  I was PISSED when this wasn't ruled a TD since Johnson is on my fantasy team, but I feel bad for Detroit too. They deserved to win that game.
  
  The "correct" call was made, but as others have said, the rule is insane. The guy catches the ball and has two feet down, falls to the ground and rolls to his left, puts the ball on the ground and lets go of it as he gets up to celebrate, and it's NOT a catch? Ridiculous! The whole "process" argument seems ludicrous to me too. How can you possibly say he didn't maintain possession through the catch? He dropped the damn ball as he was starting to bounce back up to celebrate.
• karen lotz

  

  I head someone on ESPN today say that the rule is in place because it doesn't allow any wiggle room and it is cut and dry for officials...uhhh yeah sure.
• ironman02

  What was it that the commentators were saying during the game about a "second motion" or something like that? Wouldn't the catch be complete once he has possession and hits the ground, in this particular case? At the time he hits the ground, he is clearly holding the ball in his hand. Then, he turns and puts the ball on the ground, which to me, seems like a "second motion" that is separate from the actual catch. I mean, once you're in the end zone and on the ground, shouldn't the play be over anyway?
• justincredible

  

  karen lotz;483272 wrote:What? Edwards' helmet could have severely injured the soccer cleats on the kicker's foot. I expect a fine and possible suspension for Edwards. BUSH league move.

  
  Agreed. Edwards should expect a call from Goodell.
• karen lotz

  

  ironman02;483290 wrote:What was it that the commentators were saying during the game about a "second motion" or something like that? Wouldn't the catch be complete once he has possession and hits the ground, in this particular case? At the time he hits the ground, he is clearly holding the ball in his hand. Then, he turns and puts the ball on the ground, which to me, seems like a "second motion" that is separate from the actual catch. I mean, once you're in the end zone and on the ground, shouldn't the play be over anyway?

  
  Up until this year it would have been a catch. But since he didn't make a football move such as reaching for the pylon or tucking the ball or taking a step, it was all considered one "process." And since the ball coming out was part of that process, it wasn't a completed pass. The ex rules official they had on said if he would have caught the ball at the 1 and fell like he did and the ball had come out it would have been complete.
• justincredible

  

  The whole concept of a "football move" pisses me off.
• karen lotz

  

  Me too, what the hell else kind of moves would NFL players be making during a game?
• justincredible

  

  They certainly aren't making potato farming moves.
• HitsRus

  

  wow...that was BS. Three steps and a knee down...
• Heretic

  

  justincredible;483299 wrote:The whole concept of a "football move" pisses me off.

  
  Exactly. I think I read earlier (maybe even on this thread...I don't remember things) that if Johnson's landing and sliding/rolling before he lost the ball involved him crossing the goal line, it would have been a score, because apparently the act of crossing the goal line is a "football move" (ie: fumbling the ball as you reach it across the goal line). But since he was established in the end zone when this all went down, it didn't count. Utterly stupid. Maybe that fucktard Goodell should worry about his retarded on-field rule system instead of how much he can fine/suspend players for random shit.
• Glory Days

  

  The call was correct. and you cant compare this to a running back jumping over the line or reaching over the line with the ball and fumbling it since possession was already established by the runner and was not a forward pass. however what gets me is this call was made in the superbowl for the saints when it should have been overturned. i also believe the raiders had a similar play last year where the receivers feet were in bounds and he fell to the ground out of bounds and hit the ground causing the ball to fall out.
  
  i actually think the rule makes sense, how many times have you seen a receiver catch the ball in the endzone with 2 feet down, but have the ball knocked out by a defensive player? that isnt a TD either even though he had the ball in his hands and two feet were down.
• karen lotz

  

  If I heard right, this rule wasn't in place for last season or the Super Bowl...
• justincredible

  

  karen lotz;483540 wrote:If I heard right, this rule wasn't in place for last season or the Super Bowl...

  
  Correct. Brand new for this year.
• ts1227

  

  Heretic;483354 wrote: Maybe that fucktard Goodell should worry about his retarded on-field rule system instead of how much he can fine/suspend players for random shit.

  
  He's too busy looking for ways to make this looming lockout look like the players' fault, though most of the sticking points will revolve around Goodell and his power tripping.
• Glory Days

  

  justincredible;483584 wrote:Correct. Brand new for this year.

  
  you sure about that? this was brought up last year in games for sure, plus i havent seen that when looking at new rules for this year. found these on several websites:
  

  Following are the 2010 changes:
  
  •UNNECESSARY ROUGHNESS: Existing unnecessary roughness rules have been standardized and protection for defenseless players has been expanded, including additional safeguards for defenseless players who have just completed a catch from blows to the head or neck by an opponent who launches, and long snappers.
  
  "We wanted to make sure we have consistent language that lines up for all categories of players and expand the protection that applies to those players," says Atlanta Falcons President and Co-Chairman of the NFL Competition Committee Rich McKay. All unnecessary roughness violations result in a 15-yard penalty.
  •HELMET REMOVAL: If a ball carrier's helmet comes off during a play, the ball will immediately be blown dead.
  
  "We watched some tape where players are running in the field of play without helmets," says McKay. "In our mind that is not a safe situation."
  •DEAD BALL FOULS: If there is a dead ball personal foul by either team following the end of the second or fourth quarter, the penalty yardage will now be enforced on the second-half kickoff, or the kickoff in overtime.
  •INSTANT REPLAY: Two adjustments were made to instant replay procedures in the interest of competitive fairness:
  -- If there is not an on-field ruling that a ball strikes a video board, guide wire, sky cam or any other object, the replay assistant may now initiate a booth review, even if the event occurs prior to the two-minute warning.
  
  -- If a replay review inside of one minute of either half results in the on-field ruling being reversed and the correct ruling would not have stopped the game clock, then there will be a 10-second runoff before the ball is put back in play.
  •JERSEY NUMBERS: In addition to numbers 60-79 and 90-99, defensive linemen are now permitted to wear numbers 50-59. Also, players who change positions are no longer required to switch jersey numbers if the change is from an ineligible position to another ineligible position (e.g. center to offensive guard) or from an eligible position to another eligible position (e.g. running back to wide receiver).
  •FAIR CATCH MUFFS: The penalty yardage for interference when a kicking team player attempts to catch a muffed kick has been eliminated. A penalty for unnecessary roughness, if applicable, would not be affected.

• Footwedge

  ironman02;483290 wrote:What was it that the commentators were saying during the game about a "second motion" or something like that? Wouldn't the catch be complete once he has possession and hits the ground, in this particular case? At the time he hits the ground, he is clearly holding the ball in his hand. Then, he turns and puts the ball on the ground, which to me, seems like a "second motion" that is separate from the actual catch. I mean, once you're in the end zone and on the ground, shouldn't the play be over anyway?

  ^^^This is exactly how I see this play. I understand the rule....but the receiver was wayyyyy beyond the point of "completing the move" or whatever. Thus....my hypothetical question above....if a receiver is cutting straight across the field....in the end zone...catches the ball cleanly....and takes 4 or 5 full steps...and then trips and falls dislodging the ball...is it not a touchdown? Somewhere n the bizzarro world of this rule, a line has to be drawn.. In this instance, the line has definitely been crossed. Even the football rules purists cannot look at this play and tell me that that wasn't an absolute touchdown...because it was.
• sportchampps

  i hope someone drops the ball while flipping into the enzone celebrating and the flip is ruled a football move b/c he was crossing the line. Dumb rule and if Megatron would have stood up with the ball in his hand does that make it a catch
• justincredible

  

  sportchampps;484490 wrote:i hope someone drops the ball while flipping into the enzone celebrating and the flip is ruled a football move b/c he was crossing the line. Dumb rule and if Megatron would have stood up with the ball in his hand does that make it a catch

  
  Yep, because standing up is a "football move" right? :rolleyes:
• sherm03

  

  sportchampps;484490 wrote:i hope someone drops the ball while flipping into the enzone celebrating and the flip is ruled a football move b/c he was crossing the line. Dumb rule and if Megatron would have stood up with the ball in his hand does that make it a catch

  
  If he stands up with the ball in his hands...this whole point is moot because that would mean that he never lost possession when hitting the ground.
  
  You may or may not like the rule and that's fine. But the bottom line is, if Johnson pulls that ball to his chest instead of risking having it knocked out of his hand by the ground...none of this discussion happens.
  
  By the way...hasn't this been a rule in college football for sometime? I seem to remember seeing a lot of plays where a WR is standing in the endzone and catches the ball as he is falling out of the end zone. When he hits the ground, the ball pops out and it is ruled an incomplete pass because he didn't keep control after falling to the ground.
• Non

  

  I can't believe the outrage about this.
  
  This has been the rule for several years and every time it happens people go crazy and act like they don't understand it.
  
  It happened last year, first game of the season to the Raiders. Same thing you have to maintain possession.
  
  I don't care if they change it but I'm surprised at so many people who didn't know this because there have been many similar plays the last few years.
• Glory Days

  

  Non;485187 wrote:I can't believe the outrage about this.
  
  This has been the rule for several years and every time it happens people go crazy and act like they don't understand it.
  
  It happened last year, first game of the season to the Raiders. Same thing you have to maintain possession.
  
  I don't care if they change it but I'm surprised at so many people who didn't know this because there have been many similar plays the last few years.

  
  i knew it was the raiders, ok i am not crazy.
• karen lotz

  

  Similar thing happened in the Super Bowl on the Saints' 2 pt conversion try. Lance Moore didn't control the ball and even bobbled it before it eventually was knocked out, yet it was considered a successful conversion. Johnson had control, got 2 feet down, then his ass hit the ground and THEN the ball came out.