The Randle non-TD ... "football move" ??? in endzone ??? ..

In comment 11887307 Doomster said:

Quote:

a receiver, turns around in the endzone....both his feet are on the ground....he catches a pass....there is no juggling of the ball...it hits him directly in the hands.....as soon as he "catches it", someone hits the ball out of his hands....no football move was made.....so it is incomplete? suppose the ball is hit 0.5 seconds after the catch? one second? two seconds? three seconds? four seconds? Which one is a touchdown? Or are none because a football move wasn't made? If one is a TD, then it's based on an amount of time? Then why isn't there a minimum specific time in the rule book?

Because it would be impractical to enforce. Say it was 1 second. So, whenever a border case presented itself, it wouldn't just be a typical instant replay review. You'd have to get a stopwatch out then it all hangs on when you start the clock vs. when you stop it.

By and large, I'm all for using technology to aid the officiating process, but at a certain point, it does become an intrusion. There will always be a balancing act between getting the call right and keeping the game entertainment. I would argue that anyone who comes down 100% on either side of it hasn't really considered the implications.

how is he a defenseless receiver when he catches the ball, clearly took more than two steps down field, had enough time
to put both hands over the ball and lowered his head anticipating getting hammered? he saw both defenders flying at him.
isn't he a runner at that point in time?
not sure but i don't think it was helmet to helmet either, he lowered his head.

it a TD

matters about as much as it matters that I'm a Giants fan and I think it wasn't. Neither fact on its own stands as an argument.

why is there a forum for football in general?

The point being...Extremeskins...maybe the most delusional one-sided fans on the planet...thought it was a TD and were worried the call would be reversed since they are the only team that is both cursed and hated by the NFL refs.

However, they did say the hit on Paul was dirty and Demps should be suspended.

On Sirius and he said the Reffs got the call right. I don't agree . If that's not a TD then neither is the Ben to Santonio Holmes in the Super Bowl .

as an in the field catch. Possession for a certain amount of time for it to be a reception

you shall receive. I'll give 2 angles

there was an extra step in there that works for me as the "football move"

the caveat is that the gif is not in real time, so I don't know how to deal with a rule that says "long enough"

In comment 11887656 BigBlueinChicago said:

Quote:

at that speed it is clear that he stepped back and turned after 2 feet were down and ball was controlled in his hands. TD.

...looking at that slo-mo video.

The refs just didn't want to reverse themselves.

Bad.

Real Bad.

Is absurd. If you catch the ball in the field of play the play is still going on and receiver needs to advance the ball, protect himself, etc. Football move make sense. But a catch in the end zone the play is over so what the hell does a football move mean, that the player is in the process of starting a TD celebration? If a player catches the ball and stands there, is a catch not established and the play still live because standing still is not a football move?

At best you can argue the play was too bang bang and hence had not yet established firm control for long enough. Bad call, but at least it isn't buried in nonsense like football moves in the endzone.

if the defender would have flattened the player there, it would have absolutely been a late hit. I've seen it called a thousand times, and not just in the new, super sensitive NFL. He took two steps, and turned around while basically giving himself up because it's a TD at that point. Watch that GIF. You can see him start to ease up right before the ball gets knocked loose

In comment 11887766 UberAlias said:

Quote:

Is absurd. If you catch the ball in the field of play the play is still going on and receiver needs to advance the ball, protect himself, etc. Football move make sense. But a catch in the end zone the play is over so what the hell does a football move mean, that the player is in the process of starting a TD celebration? If a player catches the ball and stands there, is a catch not established and the play still live because standing still is not a football move? At best you can argue the play was too bang bang and hence had not yet established firm control for long enough. Bad call, but at least it isn't buried in nonsense like football moves in the endzone.

This.
I'd love to hear an explanation on what co notates a football move in the end zone. Where's the player going? What's he supposed to do once he scores? Do laps around the end zone?

To whip out a sharpie and autograph that ball; ergo, incomplete pass!

he had 3 feet down. Made the catch, left foot down, right foot, left foot, BOOM.

The refs messed this up. What SHOULD happen is the NFL reviews the tape, publicly announce an official bad call, makes every ref watch the tape and move on from here.

So...
Looking at section c, the question really is did he control it long enough to perform a "move common to the game" as described there, whether or not he made one. The section on end zone catches clearly states that this applies to end zone as we'll.

Looking at the play, it was very close. I would love to see it in a non-Giant game to really see it impartially. I think both ways to call it can be defended frankly....

So, it basically comes down to, how long does he hold the ball, and that is not specified in the rules....so, if a catch is made in the endzone, no bobble, both feet down, a defender can come and knock the ball out, if he doesn't "maintain the ball long enough", which is a discretionary timeline in a ref's head? Hope TC gets a definitive answer as to what the timeline on a catch is....

due to "excessive traffic" on it. I'll need to use another site if I can find it to bring it back.