Monday Night Football Doubleheader Thread

[Yer mom 2]

They overturned that TD? Are these guys focking retarted?

[Cuse9 128]

They overturned that TD? Are these guys focking retarted?

WOW...that was fockin' terrible!!!!! Absolutely terrible!

[dolphin-g 0]

worst call ever!

[Blitzen 0]

They overturned that TD? Are these guys focking retarted?

 

What play were they looking at?

[GettnHuge 1]

worse than that Chi-GB illegal contact call

[Blitzen 0]

worst call ever!

 

I'm thinking league apology tomorrow.

[Signature_Athletes 0]

They overturned that TD? Are these guys focking retarted?

The fans should keep calling "Bull Sh!t" the rest of the game. If in the playing field, the ground can't cause a fumble, then why is it decided that if a ball hits the ground in possession on catch, it is not controlled and therefor incomplete. Terrible rule and call!

[MedStudent 56]

The call was correct. the rule is kind of dumb. The fact that the three announcers do not know the rule is annoying.

[6 Million Dollar Faulk 0]

Possession & 2 feet down = TD, doesn't matter what happens after that, horrendous call.

[Yer mom 2]

What play were they looking at?

 

The ball moved an inch due to the ground while securely possessed, and possessed while two feet hit in bounds.

 

How do they miss that in slo mo replay? Id say fixed, but public money im sure is on SD.

[VaTerp 0]

Possession & 2 feet down = TD, doesn't matter what happens after that, horrendous call.

 

Simply not true.

 

You can argue about whether or not the rule is a good one but the fact is that the current rule is that the WR must maintain possession throughout when being taken to the ground by a defender.

 

As the above poster stated, kind of a dumb rule. But the call was correct according to the rule book.

 

Two absolutely horrendous calls yesterday though were the Megatron TD that wasnt and the Al Harris illegal contact. Inexcusable calls by professional officials.

 

ETA- I went to the bathroom during the replay so didnt really look at it again. I think that Murphy still possessed the ball even if it touched the ground and should have been a TD but I can see it the other way. The 2 calls yesterday were FAR WORSE.

[Cuse9 128]

The call was correct. the rule is kind of dumb. The fact that the three announcers do not know the rule is annoying.

"Possession: When a player controls the ball throughout the act of clearly touching both feet, or any other part of his body other than his hand(s), to the ground inbounds."

 

I would say he clearly caught it. Clearly had possession. Clearly had two feet on the ground. End of story. Refs are asshats.

[Cuse9 128]

Simply not true.

 

You can argue about whether or not the rule is a good one but the fact is that the current rule is that the WR must maintain possession throughout when being taken to the ground by a defender.

 

As the above poster stated, kind of a dumb rule. But the call was correct according to the rule book.

 

Two absolutely horrendous calls yesterday though were the Megatron TD that wasnt and the Al Harris illegal contact. Inexcusable calls by professional officials.

 

ETA- I went to the bathroom during the replay so didnt really look at it again. I think that Murphy still possessed the ball even if it touched the ground and should have been a TD but I can see it the other way. The 2 calls yesterday were FAR WORSE.

I always respect your views VaTerp, but the rule clearly states you must come down with two feet on the ground, which he did. They blew the call. I promise an apology will be issued to the Raiders within a few days.

[VaTerp 0]

I always respect your views VaTerp, but the rule clearly states you must come down with two feet on the ground, which he did. They blew the call. I promise an apology will be issued to the Raiders within a few days.

 

Cuse, find the part of the rule book that talks about a WR being taken to the ground. I believe it was added 2 or 3 years ago. If the WR is taken to the ground during a catch he must maintain possession throughout the process of going to the ground.

 

Maybe I'll google it after I finish doing some stuff for work but its in the rule book.

[MedStudent 56]

"Possession: When a player controls the ball throughout the act of clearly touching both feet, or any other part of his body other than his hand(s), to the ground inbounds."

 

I would say he clearly caught it. Clearly had possession. Clearly had two feet on the ground. End of story. Refs are asshats.

 

When the receiver is in the process of falling down he must maintain possesion throughout the fall. At the end of that play the ball was moving and it eventually came out of the receivers hands. You see it called more on side line plays where a player drops the ball after he hits the ground when he tries to tap his feet in.

[kmbryant09 1]

The ground shouldn't matter in that example because I believe the rules state if the player goes to the ground as he's making the catch...The receiver actually JUMPED UP for the pass, caught came down with both feet, and fell to the ground as his feet got tangled. It was clear he already had the catch with 2 feet down. What a bad fockin call. I understand the rule with the ball hitting the ground, but that shouldnt have even been involved in the call on this play

[kmbryant09 1]

When the receiver is in the process of falling down he must maintain possesion throughout the fall. At the end of that play the ball was moving and it eventually came out of the receivers hands. You see it called more on side line plays where a player drops the ball after he hits the ground when he tries to tap his feet in.

Yeah but the WR wasn't going to the ground to make the catch...he actually JUMPED UP. That's what I don't get...the only reason he went to the ground is because after his 2 feet came down, he was tackled/tangled up with the cornerback...

[Tony_Romo_Domination 0]

philip rivers is playing like crap. I wonder if that is really jay cutler playing disguised as rivers.

 

the raiders were supposed to suck. This game aint right.

[Cuse9 128]

When the receiver is in the process of falling down he must maintain possesion throughout the fall. At the end of that play the ball was moving and it eventually came out of the receivers hands. You see it called more on side line plays where a player drops the ball after he hits the ground when he tries to tap his feet in.

Here is what I found in my search

 

Catch in the End Zone

Any eligible receiver who catches the ball, gains control and has two feet on the ground within the end zone, scores a touchdown.

 

Boundaries and Possession

For a touchdown to count, the player must be in possession and control over the ball while in the end zone---meaning the player has secured the ball and is not juggling it. Both of the player's feet must touch down inside of the end zone if the player catches the ball inside of the end zone. If the player runs it in, whether on a passing or running play, the ball must break the plane of the goal line.

 

A forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball. If a receiver would have landed inbounds with both feet but is carried or pushed out of bounds while maintaining possession of the ball, pass is complete at the out-of-bounds spot.

 

I can't find anything that says if you catch the ball, land on two feet with possession and then land and have the ball shift and come out it's not a catch. Everything says as long as you have possession and land on two feet it's a catch.

 

I'm not trying to argue this point, just trying to figure out how the refs came to this conclusion?!

[Gepetto 994]

What a stupid rule. That was a touchdown in any other football league, college, highschool in the country.

[Yer mom 2]

The ground shouldn't matter in that example because I believe the rules state if the player goes to the ground as he's making the catch...The receiver actually JUMPED UP for the pass, caught came down with both feet, and fell to the ground as his feet got tangled. It was clear he already had the catch with 2 feet down.

 

Yep. Both feet in and ball across plain secured, TD. End of story.

[VaTerp 0]

Here is what I found in my search

I can't find anything that says if you catch the ball, land on two feet with possession and then land and have the ball shift and come out it's not a catch. Everything says as long as you have possession and land on two feet it's a catch.

 

I'm not trying to argue this point, just trying to figure out how the refs came to this conclusion?!

 

Im not really trying to argue it either. As I said before I really only saw the play the whole way through once and it looked like a TD to me. In fact I wish it was called a TD so I wouldnt have to keep watching this crapfest hoping that Janikowski doesnt get 4 more points and cost me a W.

 

I do know that its in the rulebook that a guy has to maintain possession when a defender takes him to the ground. I tried to look it up on the nfl.com rulebook section but its obviously out of date since it talks about a force out being a catch which we all know was changed prior to last season.

 

But I think that the refs clearly thought they were applying the rule that me and med student are referencing. Whether they got it right or not I dont know but Im willing to bet that there will be no league apology like someone else mentioned and Im also willing to bet that Perriea (?) comes on NFL network and explains why it was the correct call.

[AintNoStoppinMeNow 68]

And the Raiders now regret releasing Garcia!

[Yer mom 2]

Louis Murphy again, they should probably review it

 

Oh and I guess: Murphy>>>Heyward-Bey? Wheres Heyward-Bey tonight?

[AintNoStoppinMeNow 68]

WOW Monday Night Insanity tonight!

 

Let's see if the Raiders, unlike the Bills, can actually hold on and win.

[Tony_Romo_Domination 0]

calm down raider fans. we both know you are not winning this game. come on, you are the raidas. you always find new ways to choke.

[VaTerp 0]

Im not really trying to argue it either. As I said before I really only saw the play the whole way through once and it looked like a TD to me. In fact I wish it was called a TD so I wouldnt have to keep watching this crapfest hoping that Janikowski doesnt get 4 more points and cost me a W.

 

I do know that its in the rulebook that a guy has to maintain possession when a defender takes him to the ground. I tried to look it up on the nfl.com rulebook section but its obviously out of date since it talks about a force out being a catch which we all know was changed prior to last season.

 

But I think that the refs clearly thought they were applying the rule that me and med student are referencing. Whether they got it right or not I dont know but Im willing to bet that there will be no league apology like someone else mentioned and Im also willing to bet that Perriea (?) comes on NFL network and explains why it was the correct call.

 

If this chit goes to OT and Janikowski kicks a FG I lose by one.

 

I dont care what I said before. TERRIBLE FN CALL and Im gonna be pissed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[AintNoStoppinMeNow 68]

Let's see if the Raiders can at least hold them to a FG here and have enough time to go on a last minute and possible GW drive...

[buffalobillsffl2003 0]

WOW Monday Night Insanity tonight!

 

Let's see if the Raiders, unlike the Bills, can actually hold on and win.

 

 

doubt it...

[AintNoStoppinMeNow 68]

doubt it...

 

Misery loves company...

 

lol j/k

[buffalobillsffl2003 0]

LULZ Oakland Bills

 

 

that's what you get when your owners are a combined age of 323.

[AintNoStoppinMeNow 68]

Sproles just owned that drive. As an LT owner, however, I'd be friggin pissed if I wasnt up by so much right now!

[buffalobillsffl2003 0]

Misery loves company...

 

lol j/k

 

[Cstriker 2]

tom terrific....paging tom terrific.

 

put tom brady on a milk carton as missing.

 

the current patriots player wearing #12 is not the 07 brady i know.

 

 

lol yet another dumb post from you. So all qbs aside from Romo suck according to you?