Quick question /sp/. What is a catch? I thought a catch is 2 feet down with possession. The strip was clearly after the feet were down
Didn't complete the procedure. If it wouldn't be ruled a catch outside the endzone it won't be ruled one inside the endzone.
>>63623521
You have to "complete the process of the catch", which I agree is really dumb. But in this case, like the tuck rule, you can't blame the officials for making the correct call on a flawed rule.
What is a catch, and what is a catch for a touchdown seem to be two things now. In case this isn't a troll, now what defines a catch in the endzone is securing the ball through two steps and establishing yourself as a runner. Just as the moment a runner breaks the plane of the goal line it becomes a touchdown, the moment he establishes himself as a runner it is a touchdown. If you watch that catch, he is still adjusting the ball from one side to the other when it gets chopped out, so while he had two hands and two feet down he did not complete the full process of developing into a runner in the endzone. Before he had finished establishing it, the ball was stripped and thus it is not a touchdown. If he didn't move the ball before it was stripped it would have been a TD. It's very vague, but basically it boils down to "if you've watched enough football to see Megatron, Dez and others prove what isn't a catch, you kind of know it when you see it."
>>63623541
Yes it would be. Possession with 2 feet down is all you need for it to be a touchdown.
To say you have to move your feet to 'complete the process of the catch' is bullshit, especially in the endzone.
Refs sucking Pats dick once again. I seriously laugh at any Patsfag who has a victim complex saying the NFL is out to get them when they get all the calls going their way.
Personally I don't think it would have been considered a catch if this situation happened outside of the endzone because he didn't make a "football move"
So I apply that logic to the endzone as well
So, would this have been a catch if he were closer to the sideline and just fell out of bounds after putting his second foot down?
>>63623606
no, that's all you need for it to be "in bounds". having two feet in doesn't mean shit if you drop it right away.
>>63623627
assuming the ball wasn't knocked out by the force of him hitting the ground then yes.
>>63623606
>To say you have to move your feet to 'complete the process of the catch' is bullshit, especially in the endzone.
Yeah except that's the rule. As shitty as it is. It's called the Calvin Johnson rule who got fucked over even harder than ODB. Also see Dez Bryant in last year's playoffs
>>63623641
same thing if applied to falling down in bounds. You don't have to make a "football move" if you're already down. When you're out of bounds you are down.
>>63623627
Basically, you have to hold onto the ball until you hand it to the ref. Go back to the Megatron catch, He took 3 steps in the endzone and went to the ground before the ball came out and it was still an imcompletion.
>>63623521
not the way the NFL defines a catch
>>63623566
>>63623587
Reminds me of the Dez catch against the packers and I can understand what the touchdown requires but it seems too arbitrary and technical. Once the two feet are down in the endzone with the ball in your hands it should be a catch. When you look at the replays, it looks like he's making a move for the ball after the touchdown.
Follow up question, do you guys agree with this rule?
And what do you guys think about the interception that was also overturned. Does it count as not having possession all the way through because he bounced off the ground? I guess he could've gotten up and ran so it's not considered down by contact.
>>63623606
>deflategate
>I seriously laugh at any Patsfag who has a victim complex saying the NFL is out to get them
>>63623703
>And what do you guys think about the interception that was also overturned.
well yeah he didnt catch it, that was obvious
>>63623703
Nah, the old rule of two feet down with possession was way better than the current "hold onto the damn ball for dear life". And its a more difficult call with the INT, because although his elbow was down before the ball came out, the DB wasn't downed by contact.
Same thing happened to Seattle vs Arizona. Caught the ball, pulled in, turned to run, made 3 steps, stripped. Somehow, not a fumble.
You casuals really need to stop posting. These are professional athletes who are rightfully held to the highest standard. If you want to watch some half ass catches go watch college football. Also, you're the same people who bitch about Tom Brady and Peyton Manning having the rules changed to the point where defenses can't so much as breath on Qs/WRs without drawing a penalty. However, when it comes to what is and isn't a catch you heavily side with the offense. Give me a fucking break.
>>63623703
I don't really agree with the rule but I think it's been called so consistently for years now that it's surprising that people still get mad about it
After Calvin Johnson and Dez they shouldn't be mad anymore.
Who gives a fuck, if they had given him the TD then Brady would've just marched his offense down the field like a boss and gotten the gane winning TD instead. He had plenty of time.
>>63623606
>refs sucking pats dick
You clearly didn't see the game
>>63624127
if they had scored a touchdown then the pats would have had to score a touchdown, then get the ball back and kick a field goal all in less than 2 min, no
>>63623721
Yeah and what came out of deflate gate?? Get over yourself, bitchmade whiner.
Fuck you Gnatsfags. If pic related ain't a catch yours sure as fuck isn't either.
>>63623521
To everyone that says incomplete. If you also called the McFadden incompletion a catch an fumble, this was the same thing so that just means youre favoritism is clouding your judgement.
>>63624434
Are you dumb? Pats were up by 1 when that happened.
Dont let your QB get sacked by Ninkovich or drop an interception
>>63624434
If OBJ caught that TD, there would have been 2:06 left on the clock, and the Patriots still had a timeout at that point. Amendola takes a knee on the kickoff, so they wouldve had the 2 minute warning as well. Its not unreasonable to suggest Brady wouldve gotten it done.
>>63624406
all them phantom pass interferences like the one where butler played OBJ's eyes perfectly, stepped in front of the ball, not touching obj, yet obscuring his vision rendering him unable to make a catch without touching the ball or OBJ and getting flagged for PI cause OBJ fell over when he couldn't see the ball.
>>63624506
ok, now this was a catch, pats fan here, he caught the ball secured it, made a football move, i.e. extending for the goal line.
>>63624782
But he was falling down and you have to complete the process of the catch as you hit the ground
>>63624506
>>63624782
As you can clearly see
Dez did NOT control the ball
No Catch
Deal with it
The rule is really stupid and it has been since day 1. They won't revert however, any changes made will only make a catch more and more complicated
>>63624506
cowgirl pls refer to >>63625258
