- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: I rest my case, Buffalo got screwed
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:48 am to Mo Jeaux
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:48 am to Mo Jeaux
Ok explain the rule here. You saying the chiefs player has clear control and survives the ground here? 
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
1
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:53 am to lsupride87
quote:
You saying the chiefs player has clear control and survives the ground here?
Are you retarded? Where did I comment on a play involving the Chiefs? Have I also said anything about officials not ever getting a call wrong?
You can be mad, just be honest with yourself and have some integrity.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:55 am to Mo Jeaux
I am being honest when I see the chiefs play and the play yesterday I have absolutely zero idea how one is ruled a catch and one is ruled an int
With the utmost integrity I can say I have no idea what truly is a catch based on how inconsistent it is ruled week to week
With the utmost integrity I can say I have no idea what truly is a catch based on how inconsistent it is ruled week to week
This post was edited on 1/18/26 at 8:56 am
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:55 am to TigerChief94
I'll never forget that Calvin Johnson TD @ Chicago years ago where "he didn't control the ball through the ground" or some ridiculous shite like that.
It felt like that play started this BS over what is or isn't a catch.
The shitty part about this is the NFL will continue to frick up plays like this even in huge moments.
It felt like that play started this BS over what is or isn't a catch.
The shitty part about this is the NFL will continue to frick up plays like this even in huge moments.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:58 am to lsupride87
quote:
The didn’t replay it. Thats one reason McDermott was so mad. They refused to go and so a full review
That’s even worse. A controversial play that determines a divisional playoff game and there’s no replay?
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:58 am to PeteRose
Nope. He called a timeout for them to review and he went to the ref asking for it and they refused
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:59 am to TigerChief94
How did he survive the ground? That ball was in his hands less than a second before getting loose. He caught it in the air so there was never a football move.
“ A catch isn't fully complete until the player is stable on the ground (or has completed their football act) while still controlling the ball. If the ground causes the loss of control, the catch fails.”
He was never stable on the ground, he was rolling around when the ball was stripped. Not sure how this is so heavily debated? They call incomplete passes for players who hold onto the ball longer than this play.
“ A catch isn't fully complete until the player is stable on the ground (or has completed their football act) while still controlling the ball. If the ground causes the loss of control, the catch fails.”
He was never stable on the ground, he was rolling around when the ball was stripped. Not sure how this is so heavily debated? They call incomplete passes for players who hold onto the ball longer than this play.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:01 am to TigerChief94
quote:
They choose when to enforce their own rules.
Or they got it wrong on the Saints/Colts game you referenced.
It's not an easy call, so they need to do a better job of defining this in the off-season
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:14 am to TigerChief94
The Bills turned the ball over 5 times. Against one of the best defenses in the League. That's the ball game in & of itself.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:16 am to TigerChief94
He did not survive the ground with the ball in his possession.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:18 am to lsupride87
quote:
He called a timeout for them to review and he went to the ref asking for it and they refused
New York already reviewed and confirmed it before the timeout
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:21 am to TigerChief94
I would need another replay to confirm. But this play looks like they fought over the ball a bit more while on the ground.
From last night's play, there was no fighting over the ball. The very instant that Cooks went to the ground, he no longer had full possession over the ball.
From last night's play, there was no fighting over the ball. The very instant that Cooks went to the ground, he no longer had full possession over the ball.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:22 am to whatiknowsofar
quote:There are two reviews:
New York already reviewed and confirmed it before the timeout
1. New York gives a quick glance and says play on
2. Refs on the field go to a monitor and watch multiple angles and review the play
You can’t throw a challenge flag in OT forcing a full on field review. You have to rely on the refs to do it.
They for whatever reason did not do number 2 for this play
This post was edited on 1/18/26 at 9:24 am
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:34 am to lsupride87
quote:
They for whatever reason did not do number 2 for this play
Because theres nothing worth reviewing on the field.
If the db isnt there and cooks falls all the same after getting hands on it and the ball hits the ground, is it a fumble or an incomplete? That answer should tell you why its a pick
This post was edited on 1/18/26 at 9:36 am
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:42 am to whatiknowsofar
quote:
If the db isnt there and cooks falls all the same after getting hands on it and the ball hits the ground, is it a fumble or an incomplete?
Yup. Pretty sure there was a scenario of this that happened this very game. It looked like the receiver had possession in the air. Went to the ground. Almost instantaneously, the ball came out. Incomplete pass.
If Cooks had clear possession of the ball, then you wouldn't see the defender come up with it half a second after they hit the ground.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:45 am to TigerChief94
This Shaheed catch is significantly different from the Int last night. Shaheed catch was clearly a tie ball where both offense and defense had equal possession and were rolling around until the whistle blew, then the defender comes up with it. Those plays always end up as “tie goes to the runner”.
Cooks play last night they’re not rolling on the ground fighting for it, it’s really clearly taken from Cooks in the process of the catch, never touches ground, never has a continued equal possession struggle for the ball like the Shaheed catch did. Defender cleanly takes it from Cooks in the process of the catch with no time to say it’s a tie to the runner
I agree with the ruling on the field in both cases
Cooks play last night they’re not rolling on the ground fighting for it, it’s really clearly taken from Cooks in the process of the catch, never touches ground, never has a continued equal possession struggle for the ball like the Shaheed catch did. Defender cleanly takes it from Cooks in the process of the catch with no time to say it’s a tie to the runner
I agree with the ruling on the field in both cases
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:46 am to QJenk
quote:
Yup. Pretty sure there was a scenario of this that happened this very game. It looked like the receiver had possession in the air. Went to the ground. Almost instantaneously, the ball came out. Incomplete pass.
There’s no where to know this because the defender is there ripping the ball out instantly (which is why he’d down by contact vs incomplete pass)
You can’t assume what the ground would do, and the defender doesn’t get unlimited time to knock a ball loose once they are on the ground. As shown in clip in OP, ties goes to receiver as long as he’s down with firm control and contacted. Cooks wasn’t bobbling it in air or on way down, and when he hits the ground it’s the defender that is pulling it away not the ground
This post was edited on 1/18/26 at 9:50 am
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:48 am to Upperdecker
quote:
This Shaheed catch is significantly different from the Int last night. Shaheed catch was clearly a tie ball where both offense and defense had equal possession and were rolling around until the whistle blew, then the defender comes up with it. Those plays always end up as “tie goes to the runner”.
See I think this makes the Cooks catch even more complete. The defender never even has it until they are on the ground, Cooks has firm possession by himself at the high point and all the way to the ground.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:48 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
I find it funny that so many of you are blind, blatantly lying, or are just too stupid to understand the rule.
I rarely see you ever take the time to explain your positions, cite or explain how rules are applicable, but you are consistent delivering smug arrogance.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:49 am to Eighteen
Right. That’s what makes no sense. So let’s say receiver makes clear catch while falling with no defender near
As receiver falls and hits ground defender dives on him and rips ball out
That’s incomplete? I have never once seen it called that way. So truth is defenders should dive onto all WRs while they are on ground and crush them
As receiver falls and hits ground defender dives on him and rips ball out
That’s incomplete? I have never once seen it called that way. So truth is defenders should dive onto all WRs while they are on ground and crush them
This post was edited on 1/18/26 at 9:52 am
Page 2 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News