Refs didn't make the call....league office did...refs called him down
Review Interception Confirmed
- Thread starter Slash#10
- Start date
Refs didn't make the call....league office did...refs called him down
AB was catching the ball while going to the ground. Once he lost control in the process of getting tackled it was never going to be a completion. Hence when the ball never got the ground and popped up into Wettle's hands it was an interception . Pretty easy call.
The question that needs to be addressed is how many steps after possession constitutes a catch? AB took 3 steps after catching the ball with control of the ball. He was then tackled where his knee touched down before the ball came out. So if 3 steps does not constitute a catch, what the hell does? If you catch it and run 10 yards, trip over your own 2 feet and the ball comes out, is that an incomplete pass? I understand maintaining possession thru the ground if you are diving for a ball or toe tapping on the sideline, but when you are running with the ball that same rule applies? That is what makes no sense, nowhere do the rules define what possession of a football actually is.
There was a second shooter on the grassy knoll. As we notice the head goes back and too the left.
The other point is the whistle blew before he caught the 'interception' and while tgere is a rule that a fumble can be recovered after an errant whistle im pretty sure an interception is not mentioned in those rules
Its been established that going to the ground after taking a few steps doesn't count in the going to the ground rules... its just reffing the score in a big time rivalry
Seemed like more of a catch then catch by AB in Cleveland that was reviewed
Sent from my XT1585 using Steeler Nation mobile app
Sent from my XT1585 using Steeler Nation mobile app
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,981
- Reaction score
- 19,602
- Points
- 113
The NFL product sucks these days.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 16,325
- Reaction score
- 6,482
- Points
- 113
I said long ago the NFL has to change this rule. Unless the ball is visibly away from the receivers body or hands, it should be considered as in possession. Dissecting very slight movement is ridiculous. Essentially the NFL is ruling incompletions (in this case, an interception) based on something they can only see by zooming in on slow motion replay.
Steelers are lucky the Ravens weren't given the TD on that INT. The whistle must have made it a recovery at the point of possession.
This was a 100% clear catch, receiver down and the ball pops out after he's down. How the NFL ****** this up just goes to show how ****** the rules have become. There should have been no interpretation of whether this was a catch or not.
I'm still speechless about the HORRENDOUS call. Where's President Trump's tweet about it???
These refs are not being used properly.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 17,517
- Reaction score
- 21,523
- Points
- 113
You could show 1,000 people that play and they'd all say catch and down, yet the NFL finds away to make the reception rules so complex that a play like that is ruled an interception.
In the NFL, If you're going to the ground, you have to control the ball through the ground for it to be a possession. He lost it going down, it popped up, and was intercepted. Since he lost possession, it was ruled incomplete. Mike Pruista had that explained well, we just don't have to agree with it.
So, how many steps do you have to take before possession is granted? 3, 4, 10? If he gets tackled 8 yards after the catch and the ball comes out is it an incomplete pass instead of a fumble? How long does a receiver have to have possession before the going to the ground is no longer applicable and it becomes a fumble?
3 steps is a catch, but the NFL has a grey area about catching the ball and immediately going to the ground, whether you're diving for the ball, extending, or being tackled, in those instances, you are supposed to control the ball through the contact with the ground, to be ruled a catch.
Brown's catch earlier in the year that was reviewed, was nearly incomplete, but he caught the ball, immediately went to the ground, then started standing up in one motion, and the ball came out. Since he was standing up after coming in contact with the ground, it was correctly ruled a catch.
But that is how close they have to look to determine what is a catch or not.
But the going to the ground rule was specifically clarified as a reciever diving or toe tapping and falling.. taking two steps then going to the ground isn't supposed to qualify... its been rulled the football move in the past several times...
Non full time refs just dont have consistency