Lions got robbed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[USO-ORLANDO]

Are you f*ucking kidding me??That was a TD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Tepop84]

yea, somebody should go through the nfl rulebook and get rid of all these stupid rules like this and the tuck rule. dumb.

[Dave Gray]

I agree.  I think we talked about this last season with some other issue.

Rules exist to help judge a catch.  But when you look at a guy that obviously catches a TD and then it's disallowed by some technicality, it undermines the spirit of the rule and it needs to be revisited.

[mecadonzilla]

You know the best way to make sure you don't get your TD taken away from you...hold on to the ball when it hits the ground.

I thought it wasn't a touchdown when it happened because he was too busy celebrating to be bothered to hold on to the damn ball.  The ground knocked it right out of his hand, and a professional in that situation should know to hold on to the ball no matter what to make sure your catch counts.

[Dave Gray]

Fine, by the letter of the law, it's no catch.  Unfortunately, he caught the ball for a TD.

The rule needs to be revisited, because its intention doesn't match reality.

[Thundergod]

Lions got jobbed big time. That rule bows. Two feet, ass, hand, body on the ground AND contact by defensive player while in control of the ball. TD.

[Brian Fein]

Once two feet down in the end zone and possession, the play should be over.  What he does after that should be irrelevant.  Wanna discuss that further?  Fine - once one foot and an ass are down in the end zone with possession, the play should be over.

This rule sucks, I have always hated it, and the NFL should overturn the call immediately.  The new CBA should include a clause to remove this rule from the rule book.

He had possession for like 3 minutes then got up off the ground and it slipped out of his hands.  No catch?  My ass...

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

The rule is you must maintain control throught the entire process.

After watching the video, it appears that either one of two things happened.  He never got full control of the ball OR in an effort to celebrate the TD he spiked the ball too early.

If the former than the call was the right call and WR never had a TD and never would have.  If the latter shame on him for his mental mistake. 

The ref made the right call for the rule.  Fans may whine and cry.  But  every smart coach will be playing that tape, explaining the rule to the WRs and stressing the importance of not making the same mistake. 

The rule doesn't need to change, because the coaches will make sure that their players don't do the same thing. 

[Brian Fein]

The rule DOES need to change, because its stupid.  He had control of the ball, it was very clear, in the endzone.  There was no debate about that.

However, after the play was over, he used the ball to help himself get up and THEN lost control of it.

In my mind, and clearly in his, this was AFTER the play was over (possibly signified by the whistle, and an official raising his hands). 

Its a sham to take away a catch, a game-winning catch at that, for something that happened AFTER THE PLAY WAS OVER!

[bsfins]

I understand,the rule,I even agree with it in places....I watched this live,(listening through the crying, shrieking Bears fans in attendance),Fox had Mike Perera (sp?) recently retired head of officials was on while the ruling was being challenged. Brian Billick was trying to make the point the Perera,that the catch was made and it was in the second movement that the ball moved (IE trying to get extra yardage,in Baseball taking the ball out of the glove). I agree with that it should have been ruled it was a second movement....

I think the the rule should have some discretion,rather than scrapping it,like two feet control in the end zone, the field of play out of bounds keep it the same...

Slight hijack,Doesn't this rule make it almost really hard to rule a WR fumble after a catch?

I hope (With guy's like Marshall,and Bess) that the scrutiny of this rule get's applid the next time we think they caught the ball then fumbled....

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Slight hijack,Doesn't this rule make it almost really hard to rule a WR fumble after a catch?

Yes it does. 

[Pappy13]

I heard this question offered this morning.  If instead of catching that ball in the endzone he catches it at the one and reached out with the ball in his hand so that it crosses the plane and then he loses it after crossing the plane just like in the play, is THAT a TD?

They are getting carried away with this now.  Just like in the preseason game, Marshall caught a pass, took 2 full steps with the ball tucked under his arm and the ball is then stripped by a defensive back.  Fumble right?  Nope, incomplete pass.  So I guess now no matter what the hell happens you haven't caught it until you hand the ball to the ref and even that's a bit shaky.  And the really stupid thing is that the rule is there to help the officials determine whether he really caught it or not, but we now have instant replay where it's a lot easier to determine if the catch was made or not.  We don't need the rule anymore.  It needs to be removed and have close plays reviewed to determine if it was clean catch or not.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

So I guess now no matter what the hell happens you haven't caught it until you hand the ball to the ref

You might be onto something. 

New Rule:  You must hand the ball to ref after scoring a TD.  No running to the middle of the field to spike the ball on the opposing teams logo or tossing it into the stands or throwing it between the goal posts.

And if such a rule is adopted...drop Ochocinco from your FF team. 

[fyo]

I like the rule as it is now. It takes a lot of the guesswork out of it for the refs, which is a Good Thing (tm) IMHO.

And, no, Pappy, if a player catches the ball in the process of going to the ground at the 1 and stretches the ball over the goal line, the play does not die there. Control still has to be maintained all the way to the ground.

Note the wording, however. Control doesn't have to be maintained AFTER that, so letting go of the ball after going to the ground is not a problem. I would NOT have had a problem with the refs ruling the catch COMPLETE in the Lions game. In fact, that's what I would have done.

Unfortunately, what counts is not the wording of the rule, but how the rule is applied in practice. And, as Mike Pereira stated, "incomplete" is the current practice.

This is the precise wording in the NFL rule book:

Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 1
Going to the ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

----

Clearly, the letter of the rule allows for calling a play such as the one in the Lions game complete. The receiver clearly (IMHO) had control of the ball AFTER HE TOUCHES THE GROUND, which is the requirement.

[Pappy13]

And, no, Pappy, if a player catches the ball in the process of going to the ground at the 1 and stretches the ball over the goal line, the play does not die there. Control still has to be maintained all the way to the ground.

It depends because If you make a football move after catching the ball then the catch is considered completed.  If you reach the ball over the goal line that could be considered a football move and the pass would be completed at that point and then as soon as the ball crosses the goal line it would be considered a TD.  I've seen it called that way before, granted that lately they have been leaning toward there's no such thing as a football move. Not saying that they necessarily would have called that play a TD if it happened that way, I'm just saying that it might have been.