Dear refs in the Bears-Lions game

[dimbee]

Jerry Jones would have had someone killed had this happened to the cowboys. might have been changed as well. It will probably have to cost a team a superbowl for it to be changed (a team like the cowboys)

Everything I'm reading intimates that this is a new rule that was implemented this offseason, and I would assume that it was implemented because of Lance Moore's catch in the SB.

Mike Pereira explains the call in detail - VIDEO

[Epistaxis]

It was my understanding that this is NOT a new rule, and has been around for awhile and has been called with varying degrees of accuracy for quite a few years.

It really does boil down to possession. Reading the Lions message boards, they are understandably pissed, but a few of them get the difference between a ball carrier breaking the plane and demonstration of possession by a receiver.

I think the rule sucks, but if receivers focus on catching the damn ball and save the flip/showboat poo, it ceases to be an issue.

[MadHatter]

According to the rules, the pass as NOT a TD.

If you leave your feet to make a catch, you must control the ball all the way through the catch. The ball hit the ground as his body hit the ground.

Shitty rule, but the refs were right.

[Hawk]

Was definitely a TD, but the rules are the rules- unfortunately, the rules, as stated in the rulebook, suck.

this!

[Dpantherman]

[Gazi]

According to the rules, the pass as NOT a TD.

If you leave your feet to make a catch, you must control the ball all the way through the catch. The ball hit the ground as his body hit the ground.

pooty rule, but the refs were right.

Wrong! The ball hit the ground AFTER both of his feet and his body hit the ground.

[dimbee]

I keep reading comments from Cutler and Lovie and even Schwartz basically saying they hand out a book ever year, say, "Hear are the new rules" and they're counted on to abide by them... maybe the "new rules" is just generally speaking, I don't know.

[ed bell]

The sad thing about this is that Johnson had enough possession to keep this from being an issue. It's obvious he felt the TD was assured before he ever palmed the ball, placed it leather down on the ground and released it as he jumped up. Why not wrap up on the ball instead of the weak attempt to brace the fall with a free left hand? The rule still sucks, but to amend it adds to the complex nature of the possession rules.

[Darth Hater]

It's not the first time a game winning td has been robbed in a Bears/Lions game, check it out and I'd argue that Berrians was even more so a Td because it never even touched the ground. Karma can be such a MFer, sorry Lions!

http://www.chicagobears.com/multimedia/multimediapopup.asp?mm_file_id=2013&play_clip=Y&rn=0

[blackcatgrowl]

I'm seeing a lot of talk about the rules here, but not a lot of rules. So...

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/forwardpass

A forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball. If a receiver would have landed inbounds with both feet but is carried or pushed out of bounds while maintaining possession of the ball, pass is complete at the out-of-bounds spot.

So... was this a catch?

YES.... He caught the ball with two hands. Then he pulled it down as he landed on two feet. On the way down he even switched between two hands to one hand to brace himself for the fall.

How is this not a touchdown?

[blackcatgrowl]

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d81a8fd39/Competition-Committee-Completion-rule?module=HP_headlines

Bill Polian explains why its not a TD(catch).

Actually... all that was is a bunch of double-talk by a guy standing in front of an NFL Network media board.

1. His first point said that "in making rules, we make on-field officiating the #1 criteria".

Funny... if you watch the slow mo, the official with direct line-of-sight to the catch called a TD (hands up in the air).

2. He says there is no "possession on a forward pass unless the play is completed". So, was the play completed?

- He caught the ball with two hands.

- He had enough control of the ball to bring the it into his stomach, and switch between two hands to one hand.

- He was touched by a defender while falling, so when he comes down on any part of his body except his hands and feet, he is considered down.

3. His last point is that a receiver has to "show you the ball" for a pass to be considered a complete play.

This is a coaching statement.... this is not an official rule. The best evidence against this statement was presented when Eisen was pointing out all the plays were people had calls go their favor in even more questionable catches.

Polian is talking in absolutes... and the league is going to back this up because they don't want to eat crow and say the Lions were cheated... but the fact is, completion of a pass is at the discretion of the officials many times. They coach to "show the ball" to prevent any question. But a ball can be caught, possessed and the play complete even if it hits the ground after the completion.

[dimbee]

I'm seeing a lot of talk about the rules here, but not a lot of rules. So...

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/forwardpass

So... was this a catch?

YES.... He caught the ball with two hands. Then he pulled it down as he landed on two feet. On the way down he even switched between two hands to one hand to brace himself for the fall.

How is this not a touchdown?

Sounds to me like NFL.com needs to update their rules online since the part I put in bold is no longer accurate. Now the defenders are allowed to force a player out of bounds while in mid-air (even if they would have landed inbounds) and it is incomplete.

But I do LOL at you basically arguing with the NFL over what is in their rules vs what you found on the internets

[blackcatgrowl]

Sounds to me like NFL.com needs to update their rules online since the part I put in bold is no longer accurate. Now the defenders are allowed to force a player out of bounds while in mid-air (even if they would have landed inbounds) and it is incomplete.

But I do LOL at you basically arguing with the NFL over what is in their rules vs what you found on the internets

Umm... did you watch the link Inimicus posted?

Here it is again in case you missed it:http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d81a8fd39/Competition-Committee-Completion-rule?module=HP_headlines

Even Rick Eisen, who was speaking on behalf of the NFL Network, was questioning the inconsistency in passing calls. Fast forward to 3:18. Eisen poses what is a "completion". A question that Bill Polian skirted around the issue.... even when Eisen pointed out comments by what the NFL VP of officials consider a pass complete (the second act).

So I'm not arguing the "rule" with anyone. I'm arguing how the rule was applied and how this play could not be considered complete. What constitutes "possession" is HIGHLY subjective and is the crux of the argument. Of course Polian is going to take the easy way out and agree with the call and state the rule as written, but he fails to address this subjectivity at all.

And it isn't like this is a new issue for the NFL. Subjectivity for calls led to the modern day replay system. Even then they get it wrong (there was a play overturned on Minnesota last week that was clearly in their favor).

[dimbee]

Rich Eisen is a commentator. I would hope that he would grill people on this. It's not like I support the rule whatsoever. I've already said multiple times I think it's a crap rule. I can only say that the rule was applied accurately. I agree there's far too much grey area and even moreso inconsistency in the application of the rule. It seems the NFL Referees are hellbent upon enforcing the rule this season, so WRs should take note. I would certainly hope that with the amount of coverage this has gotten has drilled the point home in case their coaches have not (which would be unbelievable).