Eli's interception. Just pretend to a moment that

As usual.

He caught the ball, two feet down and begun to turn. What more was needed?

but the receiver only gets possession if there is a completed pass.

.

In the endzone, that's the end of the play. On the 50, it isn't the end of the play. BIG difference.

In comment 11884717 TICSUAP said:

Quote:

He caught the ball, two feet down and begun to turn. What more was needed?

He didn't make a "football move"

Eli got away with one that Merriweather dropped so the Randle one doesn't bother me THAT much.. but he should have had 5 TD passes. The pass was right where it needed to be.

.

In the end zone? A dance?

receiver goes up, taps his toes in bounds, and falls out of bounds? Is his act of falling a football move?

in the endzone! Two feet down and he broke the plain! Then the ball was knocked out!

but if that's a good ruling, the rule needs to be changed. The play is over the second he gets the second foot down with control of the ball. What happens if a RB dives over the top and extends the ball over the line, then fumbles? The second the ball is over the line, it's a TD and the play is over. I don't see why this should be any different.

of the NFL trying to keep people in front of their TV's.

That was a fucking joke of a call.

in the end zone and put both feet down BEFORE the hit. That, my friend, is a touchdown.

Once the ball breaks the plane of the goal line and it is cradled (not bobbled) in the receivers hands and his feet are in bounds, its a touchdown. The play is over.

The analogy to the fifty yard line is flawed because the play is not over at the fifty yard line once the receiver has possession until he goes down.

I think last night was a very close call. Obviously, based on the post game interview, the HC agrees with the fans and the QB who thought it was a TD.

here goes.

football move is not required, just control long enough for a football move.

sideline catch is a separate item in the rule book

I thought it should have been a TD but I understood why it wasn't. The ball came out right after he landed. He didn't move in any direction with the football and couldn't have because the ball was out right as his feet hit the turf. They should change that rule, though.

that you need "time" to make a football move is adding unneeded interpretation.

It should be simple - you get two feet down with possession = TD. Why they've added nuance to a rule that didn't need it is beyond me.

In comment 11884744 Clearwater Joe said:

Quote:

receiver goes up, taps his toes in bounds, and falls out of bounds? Is his act of falling a football move?

That's my predicament with the call as well. He caught the ball and had 2 feet down. He clearly had full possession of the ball when his 2 feet were down. I dont see how that's any different then when we see these guys make toe tapping catches in the back of the endzone.

classifying that one as an interception. I know it'll read that way on the stat sheet, but shit.

you need to make a football move for it to be a catch. Why can you do a toe tap on the sideline/endzone and go out of bounds, and have it be a catch? There's no football move on the field of play. I can see if the receiver falls down, the act of falling can be a football move, and he still has to maintain position through the fall. But just as often, though, a player remains upright and momentum takes him out without a football move on the field of play.

We got away with one where we stood up the redskin, forward progress clearly stopped, and then we ripped the ball out. there was a sloooooow whistle which kept the ball in play. Kind of balances out that the endzone play was a clear possession.

In comment 11884782 fkap said:

Quote:

you need to make a football move for it to be a catch. Why can you do a toe tap on the sideline/endzone and go out of bounds, and have it be a catch? There's no football move on the field of play. I can see if the receiver falls down, the act of falling can be a football move, and he still has to maintain position through the fall. But just as often, though, a player remains upright and momentum takes him out without a football move on the field of play. We got away with one where we stood up the redskin, forward progress clearly stopped, and then we ripped the ball out. there was a sloooooow whistle which kept the ball in play. Kind of balances out that the endzone play was a clear possession.

I'll repeat again:

football move is not required, just control long enough for a football move.

sideline catch is a separate item in the rule book

But by definition that does not equal a reception. As noted, you have to have possession for long enough to make a move with it or it's not a completion.

I'm not saying the call was right. He had possession for a split second. It's a judgement call as to whether it was long enough. I doubt replay would have overturned it had the call on the field gone the other way.

I bet a different collection of refs give that a TD.

In comment 11884782 fkap said:

Quote:

We got away with one where we stood up the redskin, forward progress clearly stopped, and then we ripped the ball out. there was a sloooooow whistle which kept the ball in play. Kind of balances out that the endzone play was a clear possession.

I think it was a slow whistle in slow motion but not necessarily at game speed.

Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 3

In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, after which contact by a defender causes the ball to become loose before the runner is down by contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goal line prior to the loss of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.

He is in the end zone with the ball in his hands. What is he supposed to do? He's not trying to gain additional yardage....

In comment 11884790 sphinx said:

Quote:

Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 3 In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, after which contact by a defender causes the ball to become loose before the runner is down by contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goal line prior to the loss of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.

it says the catch has to be completed. so you have to go look at the part of the rule book that defines a completed catch. that's where the football move language comes in

what happens after a completed catch (including the "football move stuff") is different in the end zone vs field of play

but the rule book says (elsewhere) that the definition of catch is the same in the end zone and the field of play

In comment 11884784 ray in arlington said:

Quote:

In comment 11884782 fkap said: Quote: you need to make a football move for it to be a catch. Why can you do a toe tap on the sideline/endzone and go out of bounds, and have it be a catch? There's no football move on the field of play. I can see if the receiver falls down, the act of falling can be a football move, and he still has to maintain position through the fall. But just as often, though, a player remains upright and momentum takes him out without a football move on the field of play. We got away with one where we stood up the redskin, forward progress clearly stopped, and then we ripped the ball out. there was a sloooooow whistle which kept the ball in play. Kind of balances out that the endzone play was a clear possession. I'll repeat again: football move is not required, just control long enough for a football move. sideline catch is a separate item in the rule book

But it's entirely possible he didn't control it long enough for a football move. Like I said, I thought it should have been a TD but it was pretty close. I'm not outraged in the refs thinking he didn't control it long enough to make a football move. He got control of it in mid air and literally the second his feet hit the ground, he got hit and the ball came out.

It was a bang-bang play. Hardly an egregious error by the officials or something I'd get up in arms over.

having two feet down isn't enough. You have to maintain possession through the end of the play.

In slow-mo you can see both feet down, but at full speed it was pretty bang-bang. I thought it was the right call ... a bad luck INT for Eli. Glad it didn't come close to mattering.

In comment 11884793 Peter from CT said:

Quote:

He is in the end zone with the ball in his hands. What is he supposed to do? He's not trying to gain additional yardage....

He doesn't have to make a move. He has to have it LONG ENOUGH to make a move. The point is there is period of time you have to possess the in your hands before it becomes a completion. It's not a completion immediately on contact with his hands.

COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS
Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete
(by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
(c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act
common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an
opponent, etc.).
Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.
Note 2: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.
If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch.
Item 1: Player 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 throughout the process of contacting 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.
Item 2: Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, or the pass is incomplete.
Item 3: End Zone Catches. The requirements for a catch in the end zone are the same as the requirements for a catch in
the field of play.
Note: In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, after which contact by a defender causes the ball to become loose before the runner is down by contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goal line prior to the loss of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.

1. "football move"
2. "completing the process"

Both of these terms seem to lend themselves to a huge amount of subjectivity, given the opportunity. When the rule was "possession and two feet" the only opportunity for subjectivity was the concept of possession...something that with today's cameras is easier to determine than ever before.

Yesterday we had two plays where the rulings, I thought, completely contradicted each other:

1. Niles Paul catches the ball over the middle, gets two feet down, lowers his head, is hit to the ground where he loses possession of the ball. He is deemed after review to have completed the process and been down by contact.

2. Reuben Randle catches the ball in the end zone, gets two feet down, turns, and has the ball knocked out of his hands into those of a Redskin player. He is deemed after review to not have completed the process and the ruling is an interception.

From the NFL rulebook:

Quote:

PLAYER POSSESSION Article 7 Item 1: Player in Possession. A player is in possession when he is in bounds and has a firm grip and control of the ball with his hands or arms. Item 2: Possession of Loose Ball. To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted, or recovered, a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet or any other part of his body, other than his hands, completely on the ground inbounds, and maintain control of the ball long enough to perform any act common to the game. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground, there is no possession. This rule applies in the field of play and in the end zone. Item 3: Simultaneous Possession of a Loose Ball. If a Loose Ball is controlled simultaneously by two opponents, and both players retain it, it is simultaneous possession, and the ball belongs to the team last in possession, or to the receiving team when there has been a Free Kick, Scrimmage Kick, or Fair Catch Kick. It is not simultaneous possession if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. The terms catch, intercept, recover, advance, and fumble denote player possession (as distinguished from touching or muffing). Note 1: A player who goes to the ground in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball (with or without contact by an opponent) must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting 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, there is no possession. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, it is a catch, interception, or recovery. Note 2: If a player goes to the ground out of bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, or there is no possession. Note 3: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession. CATCH A catch is made when a player inbounds secures possession of a pass, kick, or fumble in flight (See 8-1-3). Note 1: It is a catch if, in the process of attempting to catch the ball, a player secures control of the ball prior to it touching the ground and that control is maintained during and after the ball has touched the ground. Note 2: In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, and there is contact by a defender causing the ball to come loose before the runner is down by contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goal line prior to the loss of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.

"Completing the process" is not clearly defined in Notes 2 & 3 of Item 3, and the term "football move" is not anywhere to be found in any of that language. If this is all the NFL Rulebook does to describe what comprises a catch, then the language is lacking. I don't see any language in the rule that tells us the Randle play was not a touchdown.
Link - ( New Window )

In comment 11884816 sphinx said:

Quote:

COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds: (a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and (b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and (c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.). Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so. Note 2: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch. Item 1: Player 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 throughout the process of contacting 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. Item 2: Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, or the pass is incomplete. Item 3: End Zone Catches. The requirements for a catch in the end zone are the same as the requirements for a catch in the field of play. Note: In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, after which contact by a defender causes the ball to become loose before the runner is down by contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goal line prior to the loss of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.

Thanks for copying that into the thread (I have a .pdf).

Item (c) and Note 1 are the important items here.

Go terps, What you posted said to look at 8-1-3. That is what sphinx posted, and that is where you will find the language on completing the catch and the "football move" stuff.

the endzone to Rueben Randle had been swatted to the ground and been declared an incomplete pass (rather than intercepted) would you have challenged the "incomplete" call?" "Do you think you would win that challenge?"

The term "football move" is nowhere in the rule.

shouldn't he have to maintain possession long enough IN THE FIELD OF PLAY? I'm guessing that a second defender can't whack the receiver out of bounds during that required time of possession, so why should a receiver be able to complete his catch (time possession) out of bounds?

bottom line is that there's no point getting upset about rules you disagree with. I'd be surprised if any us of don't have at least one rule we think is misguided. What's more important is that the rules are evenly applied, especially within a game. Last night, they seemed pretty fair. some missed calls, some gifts for both teams, overall let them play.

Could be that I was just too deliriously happy at that point to be trusted, but Randle comes down with the ball, then pivots to shoulder the hit.

So even though the argument can be made that he needed to make a move, or the time to make a move - it sure looked to me like he had both the time and did make enough of a move to be considered a catch.

Oh well - that seemed to anger the Giants, and they went out and got the ball back pronto and made things right.

is ridiculous. It sounds ridiculous when you hear it, when you say it, when you read it. Is there such thing as a baseball move? A basketball move? A hockey move? It's just added nonsense to make something relatively easy to understand more complicated. Like many have already said, he caught the damn ball. Two feet down, yes, he held it. That should be it. Play over. How long is long enough? 5 seconds? 10? Hold the ball long enough to make a football move? He's in the freaking endzone. Others have said he started to turn once he caught and held onto the ball. How's that not a football move? Good thing it didn't affect the outcome of the game though.

In comment 11884854 Go Terps said:

Quote:

The term "football move" is nowhere in the rule.

yes that phrase is not literally there. it's called "an act common to the game" (and examples are provided).

basically, the NFL complicate a rule that needed no further complication. Like you said - if you get make the catch and get two feet down, it is very easy to determine. Start adding criteria like football moves, maintain possession, etc,. and all you do is widen the margin for error.

I'm a firm believer that the NFL could greatly ease the burden on the refs if they stopped making rules so intricate. eliminate illegal contact, so there doesn't have to be an interpretation on who initiated the contact, and make the criteria to make a catch more simple. It would go a long way to avoiding controversies.

The referee got it wrong (no surprise there), and I'm inclined to agree with Eli's point of view over most others.

In comment 11884765 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

that you need "time" to make a football move is adding unneeded interpretation. It should be simple - you get two feet down with possession = TD. Why they've added nuance to a rule that didn't need it is beyond me.

That's what the NFL does Fat Man

and the penalty on Demps on the long pass down the middle, were just bad calls.....

Simms was talking about a blow to the head, yet Demps led with his shoulder and the receiver lowered his helmet into him.....and then he didn't maintain possession, when going to the ground....the wording on these rules is too suggestive and open to interpretation by an individual referee...

posted the 2004 version of the rules on one of the threads, and it basically was the way most people want it.

He was not juggling the ball when it was knocked out. He had clear possession with both feet down in the end zone. No 'football move' is required. A pity call by the refs because the skins were getting blown out at home on national TV.

If that call had cost us the game all the people that claim the call was correct would be hunting the ref down with torches and pitchforks.

Eli has 5 int's.....one off a foot, one off a shoulder pad, one on a desperation pass at the end of the game, and one that should have been a td pass.....so while he has five, he really should only have two....

The quality of refereeing has only gone down since its inception, and the stoppages are interminable. I could have screamed on the Niles Paul play...

- Paul is clearly injured; commercial break
- Return from 2 minute or so commercial break, refs announce they will review the play; commercial break

What the fuck?