Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    rNemesis's Avatar
    rNemesis is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Nassau
    Age
    29
    Posts
    768
    Rep Power
    9

    They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Hey did anyone see that last play of the Bears Lions game? That call was a bunch of you know what!!! How could they say that he dropped or bobbled that ball; that was a FAIR CATCH!!!! The ZEBRAS did it again dred wowwww....

    Could anyone prove me wrong or explain why the hell this happened and they made that TERRIBLE call? That is so unfair unless someone shows me something that I dont know?

    How do you feel about the Bears cheating to a 1-0 start?

    By the way, I know this is not a Lions or Bears website I just had to get this off my chest man...


  2. #2
    C-Mob 71's Avatar
    C-Mob 71 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    S. Illinois
    Posts
    1,506
    Rep Power
    45

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Apparently as the rule is worded they got it right, its a "process". That said the rule is wrong, if that wasn't a TD I don't know what is.

    (Probably should be moved to NFL Talk though)

  3. #3
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,754
    Rep Power
    129

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Detroit was absolutely screwed. I know what the rule is, but it should be open to interpretation and not just enforced as a specific "process". It's rediculous. The catch was made, steps were taken, he landed on his side, then put his hand down with the ball and only then did it pop out. I can understand a play where the receiver makes the catch as he hits the ground, but not what happened in the game today.

  4. #4
    makersncoke's Avatar
    makersncoke is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    mo
    Age
    47
    Posts
    659
    Rep Power
    21

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike View Post
    Detroit was absolutely screwed. I know what the rule is, but it should be open to interpretation and not just enforced as a specific "process". It's rediculous. The catch was made, steps were taken, he landed on his side, then put his hand down with the ball and only then did it pop out. I can understand a play where the receiver makes the catch as he hits the ground, but not what happened in the game today.
    I am in complete agreement with you, the league has gotten too complex when it comes to the interpetation of some of it's rules. I say go back to the good ole two feet down in bounds with the ball in your hands. How freakin hard would that be? I seriously believe that the way the league is going there will have to be lawyers on the sidelines to argue the challenges before too long. This is getting waaaaaaay out of control.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  5. #5
    01d 0rd3r's Avatar
    01d 0rd3r is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    1,259
    Rep Power
    28

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I'll refrain myself, and just go ahead and say that will be remembered as the worst call of the year.

  6. #6
    LA Rammer's Avatar
    LA Rammer is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Wilmington, CA
    Age
    44
    Posts
    2,757
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    complete justification (rule) ask the cheatriots
    LA RAMMER

    It's Jim not Chris
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HNgqQVHI_8

  7. #7
    Ramblin` Ram's Avatar
    Ramblin` Ram is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Nation of Rams
    Age
    38
    Posts
    2,401
    Rep Power
    54

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by rNemesis View Post
    Hey did anyone see that last play of the Bears Lions game? That call was a bunch of you know what!!! How could they say that he dropped or bobbled that ball; that was a FAIR CATCH!!!! The ZEBRAS did it again dred wowwww....

    Could anyone prove me wrong or explain why the hell this happened and they made that TERRIBLE call? That is so unfair unless someone shows me something that I dont know?

    How do you feel about the Bears cheating to a 1-0 start?

    By the way, I know this is not a Lions or Bears website I just had to get this off my chest man...
    can talk about anything on here really other than politics and religion..oh and stuff that may corrupt the flower like minds of our younger members etc... though would suggest posting it in the correct forum,just to save the mods and admin the extra workload.

    anyway back on topic..yeah i think they were cheated out of a victory..but not by the Bears ,the Bears didn`t cheat atall...just the Penguins made a bad call.

    i used to have some love for Detroit as respected their loyal long suffering fans..but since we have become competitors for not being the worst NFL team and after a Detroit fan patronisingly told me last year what exactly was the problem with the Rams,as if i didn`t know and he knew more about the club i`ve supported for 27 years than me..then screw Detroit..it`s a dog eat dog and nobody wants to be the runt of the NFL litter.
    Last edited by Ramblin` Ram; -09-13-2010 at 04:28 PM.

  8. #8
    3STL9's Avatar
    3STL9 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    209
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    NFL Evolves, after this I am sure they will take a look at the rule this offseason.

    But yeah it was interpreted correctly but should have been subjective about it for once

  9. #9
    RockinRam's Avatar
    RockinRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    4,116
    Rep Power
    44

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ramblin` Ram View Post
    can talk about anything on here really other than politics and religion..oh and stuff that may corrupt the flower like minds of our younger members etc... though would suggest posting it in the correct forum,just to save the mods and admin the extra workload.

    anyway back on topic..yeah i think they were cheated out of a victory..but not by the Bears ,the Bears didn`t cheat atall...just the Penguins made a bad call.

    i used to have some love for Detroit as respected their loyal long suffering fans..but since we have become competitors for not being the worst NFL team and after a Detroit fan patronisingly told me last year what exactly was the problem with the Rams,as if i didn`t know and he knew more about the club i`ve supported for 27 years than me..then screw Detroit..it`s a dog eat dog and nobody wants to be the runt of the NFL litter.

    Well, you have to remember, one Detroit fan doesn't resemble the feelings of the whole fanbase.

    I mean, it's like some Detroit fan meeting a frustrated and angry Rams fan, and then they assume the whole fanbase is like that one guy.

  10. #10
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,689
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    The officials got the call right based upon what the rule is. Whatever the officials did in that situation, they were going to be criticized. If they rule it a touchdown, then they're going against the rules of the game and Bears fans would be irate.

    Whether or not the rule should be in place is another discussion. Removing the whole "have to maintain possession through the entire process of the catch" portion of the rule means that you're probably going to have more subjective judgment calls by officials on the field, which I'm not sure is a good thing either.

    The best solution to this is probably for coaches to simply hammer it in to the mind of their players that they need to hold onto the ball until the play is over. I think we can all agree that Johnson clearly had possession of the ball, but by letting go of it when he turned over and started to get up, he opened up the door for the catch to be questioned.
    Last edited by Nick; -09-14-2010 at 11:18 PM.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Four
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  11. #11
    Ramblin` Ram's Avatar
    Ramblin` Ram is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Nation of Rams
    Age
    38
    Posts
    2,401
    Rep Power
    54

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by RockinRam View Post
    Well, you have to remember, one Detroit fan doesn't resemble the feelings of the whole fanbase.

    I mean, it's like some Detroit fan meeting a frustrated and angry Rams fan, and then they assume the whole fanbase is like that one guy.
    that wasn`t the main reason i don`t cheer them on (like i used to when they weren`t playing us) i don`t see the entire fanbase of any team as the same..not even the Raiders,Niners,Cowboys etc...
    i should have mentioned it was a guy i see once every year or so..so would like to be able to Ram those words down his throat,the next time we meet..
    however none of that was the primary reason why i don`t care for Detroit anymore...was more to do with me wanting us to get as far away from the bottom as possible and away from those top 2 picks. whoever finishes bottom gets disrespected by the fans of teams above us and the media..i want some other team and their fans deal with that,rather than us ...although i firmly believe we are back on track these days..we aren`t yet in a position where the other lower ranked teams results don`t have an effect on us..so until then..may Lions,Buc,Browns etc..lose,lose,lose..

  12. #12
    berg8309's Avatar
    berg8309 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,899
    Rep Power
    42

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by makersncoke View Post
    I seriously believe that the way the league is going there will have to be lawyers on the sidelines to argue the challenges before too long. This is getting waaaaaaay out of control.
    That would be sweet, I could use a job.

  13. #13
    Curly Horns's Avatar
    Curly Horns is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    1st & Goal
    Posts
    2,676
    Rep Power
    58

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Why The NFL's Rule, Referee's Interpretation Of Calvin Johnson's No Catch Are Wrong
    by Sean Yuille on Sep 13, 2010 11:13 AM EDT in Detroit Lions Opinion 95 comments


    More photos Charles Rex Arbogast - AP .
    Calvin Johnson begins the process of catching what should have been a potential game-winning touchdown for the Lions. When does the process of making a catch end? The NFL's rules aren't clear.

    Browse more photos
    The controversial finish to yesterday's Lions-Bears game has generated a national debate over both the call and the rule that kept Calvin Johnson from scoring what could have been the game-winning touchdown for Detroit. I think almost everyone can agree that the rule that made the pass incomplete stinks; there doesn't seem to be much disagreement there. Some disagreement can be found on the topic of the interpretation of the call, however. It seems as though many fans, both of the Lions and of other teams, believe the rule was incorrectly interpreted, whereas many of the national pundits think there was no issue with the interpretation, just the rule itself.

    I've gone back and forth on this a bit as I watched replays of Johnson's no catch and still believe that the rule itself was not interpreted correctly. While I can see where those believing the correct call was made based on the rule are coming from, to me Johnson made a catch, even based on the awful rule currently in place.

    First things first, let's look at the rules that the incomplete call was based on. For example, what is a catch based on the NFL rulebook? (continued after the jump)



    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.
    . . .

    If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body other than his hands to the ground, or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch.

    Based on that part of the rule, Johnson made a catch. The caveat is the "Item 1" portion of the rule, which deals with going to the ground.

    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 after he touches 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.

    This specific item is the main problem with the rule, because there is nothing specific about how long a player must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground. It simply states that he must maintain control after touching the ground, which is where the idea of this being a process comes from. The problem is there is nothing about how long of a process this is, which leaves the rule open to complete interpretation. While some, including the officials, may see the play and think it was incomplete, others, like myself, believe it was a catch.


    Think of it this way: If Calvin Johnson goes up and makes a catch and then goes to the ground, lays there with the ball in his hands for 10 minutes and then drops it as he's getting up, is that a catch or not? According to the rule, Johnson "must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground." Because nothing is specified about just how long he must maintain control, an official could theoretically rule the pass incomplete despite Johnson having the ball in his hands for 10 minutes. Then again, because the length of this process is not specified, an official could also rule that Johnson made the catch, as it is unreasonable to call it incomplete after he was on the ground with the ball for 10 minutes. Clearly that would be a catch; it's just this crappy rule makes it possible for it to be called incomplete.

    Going forward, I don't think there's any doubt that this rule needs to be changed or at the very least cleared up. With the way it is worded right now, a player could theoretically make a catch, maintain possession after hitting the ground and then have the pass ruled incomplete because he simply handed the ball to an official. There is nothing in the rules about a second act, such as the receiver getting up off the ground, and there most certainly is nothing about how long he must maintain possession of the ball. While a player almost certainly would have the play ruled a catch if he gets up off the ground with the ball, the rule is so ambiguous that you could come up with many scenarios where an obvious catch could be interpreted as being incomplete.

    I think we can all agree at this point that the rule and the way it is worded need to be changed, as it is just too vague right now. It doesn't help the matter when you have this added caveat a couple items later, making things even more confusing for the officials:

    Item 3: End Zone Catches. If a player catches the ball while in the end zone, both feet must be completely on the ground before losing possession, or the pass is incomplete.

    Again, the NFL rulebook needs some changing, as Item 3 comes into contradiction with Item 1 and again leaves things open to too much interpretation. For example, based on Item 3, Johnson made a catch. He caught the ball in the end zone and got both feet down before losing possession.

    Even if you want to base what happened solely on Item 1, I still think it's a catch. Remember, "he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground." Well, Johnson maintained control as he put his two feet down, he maintained control as his leg and knee hit the ground, he maintained control as his butt hit the ground and he maintained control as his left arm hit the ground. At what point is Johnson actually considered on the ground, allowing for it to be determined that he maintained control after touching the ground? To me it's after his leg, arm and butt are all down. The ball came out only after he started to roll over and hit the ground with it, which is a second act if you ask me. Better yet, I consider the second act to be anything after the referee closest to him signaled a touchdown, indicating that the play was over and the ball could be let go of.

    I can certainly understand why others would interpret this process of going to the ground differently, because the rule is terrible. That is how referee Gene Steratore came up with this explanation following the game:

    Q. What is the rule used on the near Detroit touchdown at the end of the game?
    A. The ruling is that in order for the catch to be completed he has got to maintain possession of the ball throughout the entire process of the catch.

    Q. He was on his behind before he rolled over. If he stayed on his behind would it have been a touchdown?
    A. No. We dont play with the two feet or one knee or anything of that scenario. Were talking now about the process of the catch. Hes catching the football, as he goes to the ground, he must maintain possession of the ball throughout the entire process. So as he continues to fall if he fell with two feet and his elbow hit the ground and came out it would be incomplete.

    Q. It looked like he had the ball up in one hand while on his rear end, but there was continuation?
    A. Well, the process was not finished until he finished that roll and the entire process of that catch.

    Here's my main issue with this whole call: The rule does not outline a process of completing the catch. Again, "he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground." That is what the rule states. It does not say anything about a process of the catch or how Johnson's "roll" must be finished before this so-called process is complete. All the rule says is that Johnson must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground. Well, to me he did just that, which is why I do believe the Lions were robbed of a win or at the very least taking the lead with less than 30 seconds to play and having a very good chance of winning.

    At the end of the day, I harbor no ill will toward the referee, because he simply interpreted the NFL's terribly worded and extremely vague rule about going to the ground and making a catch in his own way. I don't think his interpretation is correct, but that is apparently because he and I have different definitions about touching the ground and how long this so-called process must last. In that regard, the NFL is squarely to blame, as it needs to clear up its own rules about catches.






    Personally, I don't see where johnson ever lost control of the ball throughout the entire process. He has control all the way up to the point of the ball touching the ground. Where in item #1 does it say "If he loses control when the ball touches the ground" ???

    Just my take





  14. #14
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: They were cheated!!!!!!!!!!!!

    What happened to the old rule that the ground can't cause a fumble? In my opinion, the rule cited in this instance only applies specifically to when the player is in the air. If at any point, he has put both feet on the ground with possession of the ball (i.e. it's not wobbling around in his hands), the catch should be no longer be considered "in progress".

    In order to make the call they did, I think they would have had to determine that from the time that the ball stopped moving in his hand to the time it came loose, one of his feet had not yet touched the ground. I don't think the rule needs to be changed; I just think they made the wrong call under the current rule.

Similar Threads

  1. NFL's Blackeye turning into cancerous tumor
    By LaRamsFanLongTime in forum NFL TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -05-16-2008, 01:24 PM
  2. Did we cheat when we signed Josh Brown?
    By MauiRam in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: -03-25-2008, 11:47 PM
  3. Replies: 14
    Last Post: -09-14-2007, 02:47 PM
  4. I feel cheated by Freeney and Sanders!
    By HUbison in forum NFL TALK
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: -10-20-2005, 08:23 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •