rich4eagle Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 By the same token you are wrong again. It was a completion to Holmes blown by the referees and again misread by you. But since you have no clue about simple math, how can one construe you understand that two steps after possession constructs a clear reception .......what follows is either down by contact with the ground or a fumble........a fumble was clearly the case and recovery....or was it down by contact..........that is the question........the bigger issue is did the recovery occur before or after the endzone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUNSofSTEEL08 Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 As I have said in several posts, I don't agree with the rule, but it is the rule. At the same token, I am sure you wouldn't have wanted the incompletea pass to Washington on the first drive ruled a fumble (two feet down and control of the ball). Well Being Holmes had a TD.... YES I would take my Chances. But Dude , bottom line is a Catch is a Catch !!!! Its just stupid !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl34 Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 I don't agree with the rule but "incomplete" is the proper call based on the rule which states that the receiver must maintain possession even while hitting the ground if he went down AS A RESULT OF CONTACT. I'm as appalled by the poor officiating as anyone but that's the right call. They've been beating this like a dead horse all season. You get hit and go down...you have to maintain control throughout. That's the rule. It may suck like the "Tuck Rule" but as of right now...that's the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich4eagle Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 So if the receiver catches the ball and drags the defender for twenty yards and then hits the ground it is incomplete because of contact??????????????/ OH YEAH The refs blew the call big time ........they did not even know their own rules two steps with possession means complete and that happened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Masters Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 By the same token you are wrong again. It was a completion to Holmes blown by the referees and again misread by you. But since you have no clue about simple math, how can one construe you understand that two steps after possession constructs a clear reception .......what follows is either down by contact with the ground or a fumble........a fumble was clearly the case and recovery....or was it down by contact..........that is the question........the bigger issue is did the recovery occur before or after the endzone *yawn* Funny, no news is even talking about the play today, because it was the right call, by the rules in the NFL. Notice you don't touch the play with Washington that would follow the same logic and should have been a fumble then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Masters Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 Well Being Holmes had a TD.... YES I would take my Chances. But Dude , bottom line is a Catch is a Catch !!!! Its just stupid !! Like I said, I don't agree with the rule and I personally think it should be a TD. But what I think or believe the rule should be doesn't matter. I don't write the NFL rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Masters Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 So if the receiver catches the ball and drags the defender for twenty yards and then hits the ground it is incomplete because of contact??????????????/ OH YEAH The refs blew the call big time ........they did not even know their own rules two steps with possession means complete and that happened Jesus, the first part makes zero sense there chief. Yes, two steps, but only two steps is all he had. He didn't have two feet down, then two steps. As I have said, it's the same play as when a guy jumps up, comes down with the ball and two feet in (on the sideline or in the endzone), goes to the ground and drops the ball. A player must control the ball all the way through the catch including hitting the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Masters Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 I don't agree with the rule but "incomplete" is the proper call based on the rule which states that the receiver must maintain possession even while hitting the ground if he went down AS A RESULT OF CONTACT. I'm as appalled by the poor officiating as anyone but that's the right call. They've been beating this like a dead horse all season. You get hit and go down...you have to maintain control throughout. That's the rule. It may suck like the "Tuck Rule" but as of right now...that's the rule. Exactly and I agree with you 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yeahDAisafuturehofer... Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 *yawn* Funny, no news is even talking about the play today, because it was the right call, by the rules in the NFL. Notice you don't touch the play with Washington that would follow the same logic and should have been a fumble then. I personally believe the Holmes incompletion call was correct. (But then again, I have been repeatedly been told I am the stupidest person on this board, so don't listen to me ) Masters, if we use you logic the nonholding calls the Ravens O-line got away with and the roughing the punter call would have also been correct becuase those calls aren't being talked about either. I get where you are coming from but just saying... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Masters Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 I personally believe the Holmes incompletion call was correct. (But then again, I have been repeatedly been told I am the stupidest person on this board, so don't listen to me ) Masters, if we use you logic the nonholding calls the Ravens O-line got away with and the roughing the punter call would have also been correct becuase those calls aren't being talked about either. I get where you are coming from but just saying... Holding is always a bad example. There is holding on every play in the NFL. The roughing isn't being talked about because it too is the correct call by the rules. But that's a fine example of a bad rule, at least the way it is writen and enforced in the NFL. Or the running into the kicker call in the Eagles/Cards game. That's all my point is. If that call on the Holmes play was incorrect, trust me, PTI, Around the Horn, Rome, and 1st and 10 would have all been talking about it. I wish I had NFL Network because I'll be they end up with Mike Pereira on explaining the call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUNSofSTEEL08 Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 *yawn* Funny, no news is even talking about the play today, because it was the right call, by the rules in the NFL. Notice you don't touch the play with Washington that would follow the same logic and should have been a fumble then. well NO New about it because the Steelers WON. On Steeler Radio there is plenty of discussion. And I fully understand the "Rule thing" at this Point. Common sense needs to rule stuff like this. NFL Are you listening ????? (Yeah ...I KNOW) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.