Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 147
  1. #106
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    27,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Hadez View Post
    I think that is what some of us been saying man. There are obvious examples of where pretty much everyone except people rooting for the team getting the advantage of the call (or against the other team) think it was a catch but the rules of the NFL forced the refs to call it incomplete.

    Those are obvious examples of where the rules need an update. Both you and I agree on that I think.
    You think correctly.....

  2. #107
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    hampshire,england
    Posts
    12,171
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    [B][I]The NFL competition committee has reached a "unanimous" agreement that some of the league's most debated catch controversies should be ruled complete in the future, according to committee member and New York Giants owner John Mara. They include plays involving Dallas Cowboys receiver Dez Bryant in the 2014 playoffs and Detroit Lions receiver Calvin Johnson in 2010, Mara said, and have prompted a discussion during meetings here at the scouting combine geared toward rewriting the rule for the 2018 season.

    [B]I think where we are unanimous," Mara told ESPN on Tuesday, "[are] plays like the Dez Bryant play in Green Bay, going to the ground, [and] the Calvin Johnson play from a couple of years ago. I think all of us agree that those should be completions.
    Completely disagree with Mara. He really needs to understand the rule that is pretty simple....... you need to maintain control through the catch, that includes going to the ground.

    Dez catch - I wanted the Cowboys to win and it was a great effort but clearly not a catch. He plucks the ball out of the air and as he is falling to the ground loses control and the ball hits the ground and pops back in his hands. You need to catch it cleanly, not be wobbling around with the ball while the ground helps him control / catch it.

    CJ catch - This is easily not a catch. He catches the ball in the air but as he goes to the ground the ball falls out, that was rightly called incomplete.

    Some people think it should be a catch as soon as the 2 hands are wrapped around the ball, I disagree and if a receiver can't keep control of the ball going to the ground then he should not be awarded with a catch for his mistake.

  3. #108
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    27,680
    Quote Originally Posted by bronx_2003 View Post
    Completely disagree with Mara. He really needs to understand the rule that is pretty simple....... you need to maintain control through the catch, that includes going to the ground.

    Dez catch - I wanted the Cowboys to win and it was a great effort but clearly not a catch. He plucks the ball out of the air and as he is falling to the ground loses control and the ball hits the ground and pops back in his hands. You need to catch it cleanly, not be wobbling around with the ball while the ground helps him control / catch it.

    CJ catch - This is easily not a catch. He catches the ball in the air but as he goes to the ground the ball falls out, that was rightly called incomplete.

    Some people think it should be a catch as soon as the 2 hands are wrapped around the ball, I disagree and if a receiver can't keep control of the ball going to the ground then he should not be awarded with a catch for his mistake.
    So if the rules committee changes the rule, are you going to say they got it wrong? Seriously honest question. Hey, they may not change it, but I keep hearing that the odds are good. And if so, I clearly agree.

  4. #109
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    hampshire,england
    Posts
    12,171
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    So if the rules committee changes the rule, are you going to say they got it wrong? Seriously honest question. Hey, they may not change it, but I keep hearing that the odds are good. And if so, I clearly agree.
    Well it doesn't really matter what I think, they are going to do what they do. Personally I like the rule as it is, I find it very clear and easy to follow.

    I believe a receiver should control the ball on his way to the ground or when going out of bounds, for me thats all part of a catch. Some people think as soon as they have their 2 hands on it then it should be a catch whether they lose it going to ground or lose it getting hit. I guess at the end of the day its all personal opinion.

    I just don't want to watch a Denver game where DT catches a slant going over the middle and is immediately smoked causing the ball to fly away and its ruled a fumble, because IMO that will be utterly stupid.

    If the rules change then this video will be a catch and fumble, I can't support that.


  5. #110
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    27,485
    can't believe this thread is still going.


    Thank you #85

  6. #111
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    27,485
    Quote Originally Posted by bronx_2003 View Post
    Well it doesn't really matter what I think, they are going to do what they do. Personally I like the rule as it is, I find it very clear and easy to follow.

    I believe a receiver should control the ball on his way to the ground or when going out of bounds, for me thats all part of a catch. Some people think as soon as they have their 2 hands on it then it should be a catch whether they lose it going to ground or lose it getting hit. I guess at the end of the day its all personal opinion.

    I just don't want to watch a Denver game where DT catches a slant going over the middle and is immediately smoked causing the ball to fly away and its ruled a fumble, because IMO that will be utterly stupid.

    If the rules change then this video will be a catch and fumble, I can't support that.

    yeah it's never going to happen, that would hurt the game and i guarantee the backlash from all the fumbles would have that rule changed back the following year


    Thank you #85

  7. #112
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    27,680
    Quote Originally Posted by baphamet View Post
    can't believe this thread is still going.
    Quote Originally Posted by baphamet View Post
    yeah it's never going to happen, that would hurt the game and i guarantee the backlash from all the fumbles would have that rule changed back the following year
    can't believe you can't believe.......

  8. #113
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    hampshire,england
    Posts
    12,171
    It looks like there will be some rule changes -

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.a76cd32fa935

    I didn't read it all but its basically saying they have made it much easier for receivers, it also says 'under the new rule the Jesse James play for Pittsburgh would have been a catch'

    IMO that is ridiculous. He loses the ball on the way to the ground and its pretty clear it was incomplete. I was cheering Pittsburgh on in that game and at the end but it would have been a joke if that was a TD.

    I think the NFL are trying to appease some fans who struggle with certain rules, and in the process have made the game worse.

  9. #114
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    27,680
    Quote Originally Posted by bronx_2003 View Post
    It looks like there will be some rule changes -

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.a76cd32fa935

    I didn't read it all but its basically saying they have made it much easier for receivers, it also says 'under the new rule the Jesse James play for Pittsburgh would have been a catch'

    IMO that is ridiculous. He loses the ball on the way to the ground and its pretty clear it was incomplete. I was cheering Pittsburgh on in that game and at the end but it would have been a joke if that was a TD.

    I think the NFL are trying to appease some fans who struggle with certain rules, and in the process have made the game worse.
    Interesting....the article you provided states it this way: "The league’s rulemaking competition committee is poised to change the controversial rule by eliminating two provisions that were particularly confounding over the years to players, coaches and fans". Not sure how you get "some fans who struggle with certain rules".....

    I think this is much bigger than some fans....most people I talk to or listen to, say it needed fixing. Matters not, the league was concerned enough to talk about it.

  10. #115
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    hampshire,england
    Posts
    12,171
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    Interesting....the article you provided states it this way: "The league’s rulemaking competition committee is poised to change the controversial rule by eliminating two provisions that were particularly confounding over the years to players, coaches and fans". Not sure how you get "some fans who struggle with certain rules".....

    I think this is much bigger than some fans....most people I talk to or listen to, say it needed fixing. Matters not, the league was concerned enough to talk about it.
    I guess I just struggle to relate because I have always found the rule pretty simple. Needing to maintain control going to the ground is not that difficult to get your head around. I can understand some fans struggling with the rule, and players in every sport seem to be a little clueless on the laws of their game, but there is no excuse for any coach or commentator to not understand, that is just unacceptable.

    I just worry the new wording will lead to lots of silly fumbles and even more confusion, surely no one can say with a straight face that the Jesse James play was a legitimate catch when the balls falls out of his hands and hits the floor as he is completing the catch, yet apparently under the new rules that would of been a catch.

    I just don't agree that makes the game better but we'll see how next season goes

  11. #116
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    11 Western+Texas on 18 wheels
    Posts
    7,322
    Quote Originally Posted by bronx_2003 View Post
    I guess I just struggle to relate because I have always found the rule pretty simple. Needing to maintain control going to the ground is not that difficult to get your head around. I can understand some fans struggling with the rule, and players in every sport seem to be a little clueless on the laws of their game, but there is no excuse for any coach or commentator to not understand, that is just unacceptable.

    I just worry the new wording will lead to lots of silly fumbles and even more confusion, surely no one can say with a straight face that the Jesse James play was a legitimate catch when the balls falls out of his hands and hits the floor as he is completing the catch, yet apparently under the new rules that would of been a catch.

    I just don't agree that makes the game better but we'll see how next season goes
    I pretty much agree with you.

    Theyíre fixing something that didnít need to be fixed.

    When that Jesse James play happens in the middle of the field, instead of the end zone, weíll see how people like the change when the other team scores on a fumble recovery for a touchdown. Remember folks, the ground can cause a fumble if the player hasnít been touched.
    Jesus Loves You, even if you don't love Him.
    Woooo!! Wooooo!!! Wooooooo!!!! Wooooooooooooooooo!!!!!
    negs are for cowards. I won't back down.

  12. #117
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    27,680
    Quote Originally Posted by broncolee View Post
    I pretty much agree with you.

    They’re fixing something that didn’t need to be fixed.

    When that Jesse James play happens in the middle of the field, instead of the end zone, we’ll see how people like the change when the other team scores on a fumble recovery for a touchdown. Remember folks, the ground can cause a fumble if the player hasn’t been touched.
    I think some of you ought to bring your concerns to the league.

    I call it progress.....
    Last edited by CanDB; 03-22-2018 at 08:15 AM.

  13. #118
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    11 Western+Texas on 18 wheels
    Posts
    7,322
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    I think some of you ought to bring your concerns to the league.

    I call it progress.....
    Itís not progress.

    Itís change for the sake of change. Itís completely unnecessary.

    I donít care about the change itself. I simply argue against the notion that the rule is unclear when in fact it is perfectly clear, even though it hasnít always necessarily been applied properly.

    The rule was applied properly to Dez Bryant, Emmanuel Sanders, and Jesse James.
    Jesus Loves You, even if you don't love Him.
    Woooo!! Wooooo!!! Wooooooo!!!! Wooooooooooooooooo!!!!!
    negs are for cowards. I won't back down.

  14. #119
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    27,680
    Quote Originally Posted by broncolee View Post
    It’s not progress.

    It’s change for the sake of change. It’s completely unnecessary.

    I don’t care about the change itself. I simply argue against the notion that the rule is unclear when in fact it is perfectly clear, even though it hasn’t always necessarily been applied properly.

    The rule was applied properly to Dez Bryant, Emmanuel Sanders, and Jesse James.
    But whether you do not like the point I made when creating this thread or you think it's easy as is, if the league changes it there's gotta be logic behind it.....and for me, it is something that way more than 1/2 the football population are backing. Seriously, outside this thread, no one I know thinks the current catch rule is working.

  15. #120
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    hampshire,england
    Posts
    12,171
    Quote Originally Posted by broncolee View Post
    It’s not progress.

    It’s change for the sake of change. It’s completely unnecessary.

    I don’t care about the change itself. I simply argue against the notion that the rule is unclear when in fact it is perfectly clear, even though it hasn’t always necessarily been applied properly.

    The rule was applied properly to Dez Bryant, Emmanuel Sanders, and Jesse James.
    Hit the nail on the head

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •