- 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: They went for it!?!?!?!!?
Posted on 11/15/09 at 11:01 pm to KBeezy
Posted on 11/15/09 at 11:01 pm to KBeezy
quote:
KBeezy
Seriously? He was over the first down line when he went up for the ball and was shoved back while catching it. He had full possession over the first down line, and again, shoved back. He had to maintain possession for it to be a CATCH, yes, but that's not where the ball is spotted. He was not coming back on his own, he was pushed back. I believe forward progress would apply here, the spot should be where he caught the ball. Pats got fricked by an official that had no business spotting it there.
quote:
When they called that ticky tacky pass interference I started to get nervous and then..well damn, NE deserved to lose that game regardless of the fact..wow, wow, wow...all my winnings today were on NE straight up. I too hope they go in a downward spiral. But knowing Bill and the Pats, their defense will play lights out for the rest of the season.
That call was bullshite and I had the same feeling of NE getting fricked the rest of the way when possible. Defender checked Collie's position then turned back to play the ball and Collie slowed up to push into him.
2
Posted on 11/15/09 at 11:02 pm to Eternalmajin
Once he lost possesion (juggle or bobble) it doesnt matter where he initially caught the ball. He cant complete the catch until he hits the ground.
Posted on 11/15/09 at 11:03 pm to KBeezy
Its possible that I could be incorrect I only saw the replay about 3 times. In about 5 minutes on espn we will see who is right and who is wrong. But since it is cut and dry I might be wasting my time huh?
Posted on 11/15/09 at 11:06 pm to Tigerstudent08
I have my own thoughts about the catch. One being that NO ONE here had a good angle at the actual spot because the camera was off, and two, everyone can watch Mike Peirera talk about this play (and probably the Packers-Cowboys fumble play) on NFL Total access on Wednesday. It will silence all you fools who think the Pats were jobbed.
Posted on 11/15/09 at 11:10 pm to Tigerstudent08
Well if you saw him controll the ball in mod air, then it is cut and dry. Because the rulebook says that he will be given possession when he hits the ground... Which is well short. Doesn't matter where he actually controlled the ball, only where he hits ground.
Again this is the rule of the NFL. If you saw him controll in mid air, and still deny it, then you are just trying to change the rules
Again this is the rule of the NFL. If you saw him controll in mid air, and still deny it, then you are just trying to change the rules
Posted on 11/15/09 at 11:11 pm to KBeezy
I will have my answer hopefully in 2 minutes
Posted on 11/15/09 at 11:15 pm to Eternalmajin
quote:
I believe forward progress would apply here, the spot should be where he caught the ball. Pats got fricked by an official that had no business spotting it there.
well there ya go... You believe forward progress would apply, but you would be wrong.
Possession rule would apply which makes it clear when possession was made
This post was edited on 11/15/09 at 11:16 pm
Posted on 11/15/09 at 11:26 pm to KBeezy
It was 100% a catch please go watch it he has 2 feet down and complete possession of the ball that=catch
Posted on 11/15/09 at 11:56 pm to rpg37
Still can't believe it 
Posted on 11/15/09 at 11:56 pm to Kige Ramsey
Shut up Kige
Posted on 11/16/09 at 12:02 am to KBeezy
quote:
well there ya go... You believe forward progress would apply, but you would be wrong.
Possession rule would apply which makes it clear when possession was made
He had full possession of the ball when he secured it to his chest and was then knocked back. Think for half a second here about any other situation where a WR jumps to catch the ball and is pushed back while in the air. Have you ever seen the ball spotted where they land? No, you haven't, because that's not the rule despite whatever you are quoting.
Your intentions are there, but either the implementation of that rule is not the way you see it, or there are other rules about this situation that you are overlooking/ignoring.
Posted on 11/16/09 at 12:05 am to Eternalmajin
quote:
He had full possession of the ball when he secured it to his chest and was then knocked back. Think for half a second here about any other situation where a WR jumps to catch the ball and is pushed back while in the air. Have you ever seen the ball spotted where they land? No, you haven't, because that's not the rule despite whatever you are quoting.
the bobble was crucial
Posted on 11/16/09 at 8:14 am to rpg37
when the double catch was secured faulks left foot was seven inches inside the 30...so faulks chest is seven inches from his foot...so the spot should be the 30
Posted on 11/16/09 at 8:18 am to rpg37
Sean Payton should have gone for his, Belichek no way.
Posted on 11/16/09 at 8:19 am to JETigER
quote:
when the double catch was secured faulks left foot was seven inches inside the 30...so faulks chest is seven inches from his foot...so the spot should be the 30
Agree.
Posted on 11/16/09 at 1:03 pm to Rex
Well, if they hadn't used their timeouts they could have still challenged it.
Posted on 11/16/09 at 3:36 pm to rpg37
Bill Belicheat sold the game.....
theres no way, he would've done it with out no reason.
theres no way, he would've done it with out no reason.
Page 8 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News