Too Much Gray Area!!!

[ruaround]

in the 99-00 NFC Championship wide receiver Bert Emanuel caught a pass that was ruled incomplete because the tip of the ball touched the ground...he dove for the ball caught it and as he contacted the ground the tip of the ball contacted the ground first...
the Bert Emanuel rule -- the ball can touch the ground during a completed pass as long as the receiver maintains control of the ball.
Definition of control needs not be left to the descretion of each official!!! because a ball is moving doesnt mean there isnt control!!! receivers get hit, are running, are going to the ground and trying to protect themselves...how can the ball not be moving?
Not because I am a staunch Bucs fan, but the Edell Sheppard ruling was a horrible call...and now the Puolimalu interseption is as well!!! I am/was pulling for the Colts but a rule is a rule... The Refs and Officiating crews really really need to revise what is and ins't a catch as well as get rid of the BIASED opinion going into a Replay Review... What I mean here is conclusive evidence to overturn...watch the play and forget about what is ruled... I am furious with the officiating in the NFL!!! they need to be full time!!!

 

[scubadoo]

The player intercepted the ball while ON the ground and untouched. The ball came lose while his knee was still touching the ground. he never established possession OFF the ground therefore it was ruled incomplete. had he intercepted while standingt, taken a step ...fell, fumbled while attemptiing to get up then it would have been rulled an interception and fumble/recovery.
Lets see what the nfl says...I believe what I am saying is correct.

 

[ruaround]

Scuba... the interception was ruled incomplete because of the Ref (morieli or morteli) stated he did not maintain posesion as he hit the ground... he clearly mad a "Football Move" and lost control after he hit the gound WITH POSSESION rolled over contacted the gound with both feet, an elbow, a knee his helmet, shoulder and then he knocked the ball out with his own knee on the way back up...he did establish possesion there is no reason for a player to "have to get off the ground"... nor is there a rule that states this...

 

[scubadoo]

Nope..he stated ball game out wihile knee was down. Rule apllied...you must maintain possession when you hit the ground...since he was untouched and had yet to get up with knee off the ground and the whistle did not blow he was still technically on the ground....when the ball game loose with knee contacting the ground he did not maintain possession. Rolling on the ground is still down.
He is not considered down by contact as no one touched him..he therefore was still technically on the gound.
Like I said...I beleive I am correct. The officals are graded so the nfl will release the ruling....right or wrong.

 

[ruaround]

so what you are saying is that every reception has to finish with the receiver making it back to his feet??? or atleast no equivalency there of??? the rule states that a player must maintain possesion and make a football move... he caught the ball and made a football move, he rolled over...
Plaxico Buress a few years ago caught a ball, hit the ground and as he was getting up he spikedd the ball... this was ruled a fumble, it was reviewed and showed at the time he released the ball his knee was touching the ground... the replay upheld the fumble...*edit* because he had not been touched...
what I am trying to get across is that the Refs dont have a cookie cutter clear interpretaion of the rule!!! was the ball moving, what is a football move, how long does the receiver have to maintain possesion before it is ruled a reception...
P.S. Scuba...you are da man... you are solid and knowledgable of what you discuss/debate!!!

 

[ruaround]

*Plaxico spiked the ball because he got a first down... he was on a knee giving the first down motion/signal and spiked the ball in celebration...

 

[scubadoo]

Nfl officials apply the following..in order to establsih possession after hitting the ground you must be able to maintain possession. His knee(s) never left the ground therefore he lost possession while still on the ground.
No..I am not statng what you sre saying. He was UNTOUCHED..that is the difference. If a colts player touched him it would have been rulled an interception...if he continued to roll after being touched then lost possession.
Thye rule here is simple...he was untouched and technically still considered on the ground. had his knee been off the ground when he lost possession I beleive the call would not have been overturned.
You cannot compare plays from years ago as the rules have changed.
NFL officials now use if you can't hand the ball, lateral, or throw it to someone after you hit the ground then you did not maintain possession. I beleive once again what I am stating is correct and how they try to apply this rule accross the board.

 

[scubadoo]

Mike Preira Officating Chief NFL......So if he's going to the ground and the ball comes out, even though there's two feet and an elbow, it's incomplete. You must demonstrate to us that you can maintain possession of the ball and perform a football act. And until you actually demonstrate on the football field that you can do that, anytime in that process the ball comes out, philosophically, and the rulebook states that, philosophically, we're going to lean to an incomplete pass and rule it that way on the field
Since the player never left the ground after making the interception while on the ground, and was untouched he was still techniaclly in contact with the ground.....in the process of getting up.....he lost the ball with knee down. In this case the player was on the ground...was untouched, rolled and in the process of getting up lost control. Therefore, while he was still on the ground he lost control.
I beleive this is the ruling applied.

 

[ruaround]

The statements above contradict... if a player is going to the ground and loses possesion it is an incomplete pass...Agreed!!!
but if a player goes to the ground demonstrates possesion and, by happenstance or intentional, is in the act of getting up what and loses possesion this is also an incomplete pass... Disagree... the rule states "a player must make a football move to determine possesion"... the rules have of possesion have not been changed since the Plaxico incedent... the officials still have alot of interpretaion at their leisure, therefore another ref could have determined that the roll was a football move and the player fumbling (the ground had no impact on the ball leaving his possesion) and recovering his own fumble...

 

[scubadoo]

Going to the ground and on the ground are differnet. One implies something different. If you have the nfl channel I'm sure they will cover this on total access after the last game this evening . I have it and will see what they say

 

[ruaround]

I will watch as well!!!

hopefully they discuss this issue in detail, not just push it to the wayside as they did the Edell Sheppard catch... since Pitt ultimatley won the game it may be just an undersight now...

 

[scubadoo]

Yep...let's see what they say. The NFL will announce something if the ruling was wrong.

 

[ruaround]

alright Scuba...what do you think of the NFL Officials missing the play clock expiring and Rex Grossman throwing an Int??? I am in complete disgust with NFL officiating this year!!! and esp in the Play-Offs!!!

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by ruaround
alright Scuba...what do you think of the NFL Officials missing the play clock expiring and Rex Grossman throwing an Int??? I am in complete disgust with NFL officiating this year!!! and esp in the Play-Offs!!!
I doubt it would have changed the outcome. In general I have seen that happen numerous times. Short of installing a buzzer....I'm not certain you will ever see that go away.
Anyway...this is the guy that I beleive is supposed to monoitor the clock.....although you will not see it explcitly stated as to which official has primary responsibility for checking the sanp is made before the clock expires.
Back Judge—Takes a position 25 yards downfield. In general, favors the tight end’s side of field. Keys on tight end, concentrates on his path and observes legality of tight end’s potential block(s) or of actions taken against him. Is prepared to rule from deep position on holding or illegal use of hands by end or back or on defensive infractions committed by player guarding him.
Back Judge times interval between plays on 40/25-second clock plus intermission between two periods of each half; makes decisions involving catching, recovery, or illegal touching of a loose ball beyond line of scrimmage; is responsible to rule on plays involving end line; calls pass interference, fair catch infractions, and clipping on kick returns; together with Field Judge, rules whether or not field goals and conversions are successful; and stays with ball on punts

 

[bronco300]

hey, dont know if y..ou caught my comment on the other thread before it was repoed....but about the play being called incomplete, i didnt actually see it because i had to work(prolly for the best)...but last week or the week prior a player caught a football in the endzone, but he was catching it "falling" down, or diving..when he hit the ground the ball came out, and was called incomplete....i dont know if this is exactly the same or not, but it kind of sounds like it could be, so just i thought id throw it out there.....wish i could remember what game it was, maybe one of you will know what i'm talking about

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Bronco300
hey, dont know if y..ou caught my comment on the other thread before it was repoed....but about the play being called incomplete, i didnt actually see it because i had to work(prolly for the best)...but last week or the week prior a player caught a football in the endzone, but he was catching it "falling" down, or diving..when he hit the ground the ball came out, and was called incomplete....i dont know if this is exactly the same or not, but it kind of sounds like it could be, so just i thought id throw it out there.....wish i could remember what game it was, maybe one of you will know what i'm talking about
The catch you are referring to is the payer appeared to catch the ball while standing, was tackled and failed to maintain control when he hit the ground. In this case...the player intercepted a pass while on the ground...rolled and loss possession while a knee was still on the ground. The ruling was that since the knee was still on the ground and the ball came lose the pass was incomplete.
The nfl network stated it must have been interpreted as the football move was not completed because the knee was still on the ground. The difference in the calls was one player did not maintain possession after hitting the ground..and the other player did not maintain possession getting up from the ground. it is the same ruling only applied in reverse....sorta
JMO...no expert and I could be wrong.

 

[bronco300]

alright, just thought id point it out just in case

 

[ruaround]

I think the catch Bronco is refering to is the Edell Sheppard catch...the NFL did say this was a catch, so did every sports comentator/analyst I listened to or watched... he caught the ball took 2 full steps and the ball came lose when he hit the ground... now the ground cant cause a fumble... the ref said he did not have possesion because the ball moved from his stomach area to his shoulder...THIS IS AFTER HE DEMONSTRATED POSSESION AND TOOK TWO STEPS!!! his knee hit the ground and the ball came out when he was in the end zone...
Scuba...never saw a thing on the Polamalu interception on the NFL Network, newspaper or ESPN... they are going to push it under the rug!!!

 

[scubadoo]

They alawys have the "dean" of officials on the show. THey stated they will follow-up in the days to come.

 

[scubadoo]

My opinion regarding overall officiating in the nfl is pretty high. Given the length of the field, 22 players and all that is monitored I feel they do a great job. The pace of the nfl game is so fast...I am personally amazed they do not miss more calls.
That being said...the only true remedy is to allow coaches to challenge any call or non-call with instant replay. Same rules would apply as to # of challenges, etc only open it up to more. FOr example, it it appears that a defender was guilty of pass interference that was not called a coach should be able to challenge that. It certianly would bring additional strategy from the sidelines.
You will never see a perfectly called game...won't happen. I do believe if the nfl went to full-time officials perhaps some of the mistakes would be cut down.
As long as humans are involved mistakes will be made. ...talking about calls/non-calls in general...not the particualr interception or issues yesterday.
The only missed calls we see are the ones caught by the cameras.....several occur...which is why I do not beleive the one caught on tape is always the only significant issue within a game....it just was caught by the cameras. THerefore, to say that one particular obvoius call or non-call led to a loss/win may not be accurate....unless ALL have been highlighted during a game...which will never happen..
Change one down and distance, etc and the entire game from that point forwrd changes.
JMO