Blandino on Ginn interception

[mc52beast]

Head of officials Dean Blandino explained the call like this; Ginn caught the ball, went to the ground and didn't complete the catch because he didn't have control of the ball. 

Dont know about everyone else but I'm still confused

[the butch]

Similar to the Peanut play in the preseason.

[VerticalThreat]

Instead of reciting the rule book to us, Blandino should explain what Ginn needed to do for that to be a catch. And he should do that with every call like this that comes into question. Educate the fans rather than regurgitate the rule that no one understands.

Just my 2 cents.

[Zaximus]

Yeah, like you'd expect anything else.   Sorry we won NFL, I know you didn't want that.

[CRA]

I agree with the Peanut preseason play comparison.    NFL says if you are competing for the ball as you go down....whatever occurs will be the result b/c they don't view the contact to the ground being a catch yet

[LinvilleGorge]

He took like 4 fuging steps before going to the ground.  At what point is a catch completed?  If Gronk slips and fallfalls in the end zone while spiking the football in celebration, is the TD going to be overturned because he didn't complete the catch since he didn't control the ball while going to the ground?

They need to clearly define when a catch is completed. This "while going to the ground" thing is muddy as hell.  The old two steps and aa football move" wasn't clear either but it was better than this mess.

[Jase]

Ginn had control... until he hit the ground.  Not sure why control has any part of it.  It's an interception under the rules because he left his feet to make the catch.

[PantherJD]

Instead of reciting the rule book to us, Blandino should explain what Ginn needed to do for that to be a catch. And he should do that with every call like this that comes into question. Educate the fans rather than regurgitate the rule that no one understands.

Just my 2 cents.

Yeah, the general public doesn't know what a catch is anymore.  There are times we think we know, but when it comes down to a play like this, we all scratch our heads and look and each other and have to rely on the "experts" to tell us what happened.  It shouldn't be that complicated.  If the average fan can't figure out what a catch is, then the rule needs to be changed so it makes sense.

[imminent rogaine]

They are arguing that he went to the ground in the process of making a catch.... so he needed to maintain control.

That isn't what happened though; He caught the ball on the run and was tackled. Down by contact with ball in hands is a catch.

[t96]

They are arguing that he went to the ground in the process of making a catch.... so he needed to maintain control.

That isn't what happened though; He caught the ball on the run and was tackled. Down by contact with ball in hands is a catch.

Exactly. He took 3 more steps after landing when he caught it. Clearly wasn't going down as he caught it so he didn't need to maintain control all the way through the ground. Either he's down by contact when his ass went down or it's a catch and fumble. No possible way it's an interception though. Even going by their ridiculous rules.

[5158Poundin]

Buttception my ass.

[FootballMaestro]

It appears to me the officials made a bad call, and now the leagues just covering for them.

If anything, that was a fumble, which I don't agree with either. But INT??...Ginn, had control IMO!

If that Ginn play's not called an INT, Eagles get blown out IMO.

[tondi]

He cleanly caught the ball (no juggling), took a few steps and then was tackled, at which point a millisecond before (although replays shows it was after) his ass hits the ground the ball is stripped from him into the arms of a defender.  It may be an interception by following the fugged up rules as they are currently configured to the letter, but theres no way in hell that was an interception in real life.  Its either a catch and fumble or a catch and down by contact. 

[PantherJD]

It appears to me the officials made a bad call, and now the leagues just covering for them.

If anything, that was a fumble, which I don't agree with either. But INT??...Ginn, had control IMO!

If that Ginn play's not called an INT, Eagles get blown out IMO.

The league's the one that made the call.  They control reviews from the replay center in New York.  You really can't blame any call made after a review on the officials on the field, other than the fact that their initial call made it harder for the call on the field to be overturned.