Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

That fumble in the Giants game.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Champs Chumps
    replied
    **About spiking the ball... years ago, my brother, a high school qb spiked the ball and got called for intentional grounding... in his high school league, it was explained you had to throw it towards the WR's.


    I think the biggest difference in these 2 plays is the content of the game... The Giants were driving with little time on the clock so a player going down makes sense to give up on the play.

    In the Charger game, it was early in the first half... so there was no reason to give up on the play, but I agree they look identical... from what I understand of the rules, they made the right call in the Giants game, but not in the San Diego game.

    It also makes me question the ruling on the Plaxico Burress fumble years ago when he was with Pittsburgh... Burress caught the ball... rolled stood up and spiked it... if that's not giving up on a play, I'm not sure what is.

    Leave a comment:


  • #87Birdman
    replied
    Originally posted by thenewera44 View Post
    I wll tell you another rule that is dumb to me and always has been. The spike to stop the clock. I think each team ought to be given two "special time outs" in the game where when you use them, it stops the clock but you also lose a down.

    The spike thing is silly.
    I agree with the "spike" its just an incomplete pass, but they need to get lined up and it runs time off the clock special time outs just seem wierd, but then again spikes are wierd since shouldn't they lose a yard for intentional grounding since it isn't thrown to anyone???? lol

    Leave a comment:


  • thenewera44
    replied
    Originally posted by #87Birdman View Post
    I think that should be the only time where you don't need to be touched but I think if you don't go down right after the snap though you lose that right. So like what campbell did in the first game and try to run time off the clock before going down you would have to wait to be touched so I say unless you go down at the snap of the ball is the only time you shouldn't have to be touched.
    I wll tell you another rule that is dumb to me and always has been. The spike to stop the clock. I think each team ought to be given two "special time outs" in the game where when you use them, it stops the clock but you also lose a down.

    The spike thing is silly.

    Leave a comment:


  • #87Birdman
    replied
    Originally posted by Hoserman117 View Post
    Well how would you do a kneel down if you had to be touched.
    I think that should be the only time where you don't need to be touched but I think if you don't go down right after the snap though you lose that right. So like what campbell did in the first game and try to run time off the clock before going down you would have to wait to be touched so I say unless you go down at the snap of the ball is the only time you shouldn't have to be touched.

    Leave a comment:


  • thenewera44
    replied
    Originally posted by Hoserman117 View Post
    Well how would you do a kneel down if you had to be touched.
    Quarterbacks have always been different in that regard. Not WRs. I remember Plaxico Burress doing something very similar. It also was called a fumble.

    It was a fumble in that game. Cruz knew it, and so did everyone else by their reactions.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hoserman117
    replied
    Well how would you do a kneel down if you had to be touched.

    Leave a comment:


  • SBboundBRONCOS
    replied
    Originally posted by #87Birdman View Post
    I think you should have to be touched regardless because I remember the bengals game against us earlier this season and Dalton went to slide so Vaughn pulled up, but when Dalton's knees hit he sprung forward for extra yards. And if you don't believe me if some one can find that video he leans back when he starts to go down and his knees hit first, so he saw he wasn't going to be touched he sprung forward. So I say just make it mandatory to touch them so they are down.
    i didnt see that game but ya if that happened then i agree, it just seems so obvious to me

    maybe they have a reason for it, IDK

    Leave a comment:


  • #87Birdman
    replied
    Originally posted by SBboundBRONCOS View Post
    i just dont get why they dont make someone touch a player, it would eliminate almost ALL ambiguity from that type of play

    either slide feet first like a qb and be down or be touched down.

    simple rule change that honestly seems too simple not to already be a rule, why let people other than the player decide if he tripped and fell or was giving himself up
    I think you should have to be touched regardless because I remember the bengals game against us earlier this season and Dalton went to slide so Vaughn pulled up, but when Dalton's knees hit he sprung forward for extra yards. And if you don't believe me if some one can find that video he leans back when he starts to go down and his knees hit first, so he saw he wasn't going to be touched he sprung forward. So I say just make it mandatory to touch them so they are down.

    Leave a comment:


  • SBboundBRONCOS
    replied
    i just dont get why they dont make someone touch a player, it would eliminate almost ALL ambiguity from that type of play

    either slide feet first like a qb and be down or be touched down.

    simple rule change that honestly seems too simple not to already be a rule, why let people other than the player decide if he tripped and fell or was giving himself up

    Leave a comment:


  • HurricaneDovs
    replied
    I watched that game and there is no way the guy was "giving himself up". He slipped. You can see as hes running how his legs just give out.

    He didnt cover the ball as he went down as if he was bracing to hit the ground. His legs were too wide as he was moving forward and he tripped.

    Guaranteed that if he had gotten up and scored they wouldve awarded him the touchdown. Instead the Cards were heads up and recovered a fumble.

    On Fox they were even talking to that replay official dude they had in some studio and he pretty much said the refs were making up for Cruz's stupidity.

    NFL likes NE. They apparently dont like AZ.

    Leave a comment:


  • thenewera44
    replied
    Originally posted by Hoserman117 View Post
    Honestly I didn't know that wrinkle of the rule until just now, he probably didn't know it either. I think he got confused, thought he was in college or had gotten touched, and then panicked at the end, and just got lucky that he had given himself up.

    He was within the rules, I think it's a dumb rule, but it's the rules.
    You see this is what I am talking about. It is an interepretation of the ref. I watched the Charger Pats play a few times and that WR could have easily been seen doing the same thing as Cruz. He thought like Cruz thought was down. he was a rookie too I believe.

    The fact is if he had gotten up and did what Harrison did, who was in a literal fetal position playing opossum, Cruz may have been awarded yards. If he got up and the defense just ignored him and he ran for a TD, he would have awarded the score. I know that was 2003 with Harrison or whatever. It still sort of makes me sick that the Pats of course gets the ball and little old zona doesnt against big market NY.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hoserman117
    replied
    Originally posted by thenewera44 View Post
    How do explain away the fact that he dove back trying to get the ball back? Let me tell you why. He is a rookie and he did what is rather common amongst rookies. He thought he was officially down when his knees touched. If he thought he was touched like he said, or was doing something that was with in the rules, he would not have been panicked. Manning knew it was a fumble, Manninham knew it was a fumble all by their reactions.

    The exact same scenario in just about the same part of the field with the Chargers and Pats last year. Virtually idendtical. Of course the Pats got that call.

    It isnt amazing to me, I get it. I think it sucks.
    Honestly I didn't know that wrinkle of the rule until just now, he probably didn't know it either. I think he got confused, thought he was in college or had gotten touched, and then panicked at the end, and just got lucky that he had given himself up.

    He was within the rules, I think it's a dumb rule, but it's the rules.

    Leave a comment:


  • thenewera44
    replied
    Originally posted by Hoserman117 View Post
    I thought it looked like Cruz purposely dove to the ground to signal the play was over, the SD receiver landed on the ground because he was laying out for a catch, not giving himself up.
    How do explain away the fact that he dove back trying to get the ball back? Let me tell you why. He is a rookie and he did what is rather common amongst rookies. He thought he was officially down when his knees touched. If he thought he was touched like he said, or was doing something that was with in the rules, he would not have been panicked. Manning knew it was a fumble, Manninham knew it was a fumble all by their reactions.

    The exact same scenario in just about the same part of the field with the Chargers and Pats last year. Virtually idendtical. Of course the Pats got that call.

    It isnt amazing to me, I get it. I think it sucks.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hoserman117
    replied
    I thought it looked like Cruz purposely dove to the ground to signal the play was over, the SD receiver landed on the ground because he was laying out for a catch, not giving himself up.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cahill
    replied
    Defense should have touched Harrison so he was down and Cruz should not have left the ball on the ground. It's the referees decision when it comes down to it.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X