REFS BLOW CALL - RECEPTION AND TD DISALLOWED
-
Masters said:
Rich and Ghoolie, even a legit PIT can see itDon't quote me as an expert but I from what I saw its an incompletion.
Don't quote me as an expert but I from what I saw its an incompletion.
Just saying that a Steelers fan agreed with the call.
-
@inspecta said:
Eh. Ghoolie is just working a new angle, he can't really piss and moan about the management so he's gotta do something to rile up the monkeysLol im sure ghoolie will still whine about mangini,ryan,kokinis,daboll,lerner...especially once they kick the steelers ass next year...
-
I thought it was a catch. Holmes stretching his arm out towards the endzone while he cradled the ball was the football move that's needed, IMO.
-
@yeahdaisafuturehofer... said:
The Browns........No glory.
The Steelers.... 3 of them confirmed to live past the age of 60.
-
Nice bullshit call on running into the kicker. Looks like the refs received confirmation of Rooney's payment.
Looks like Hines is teaching his buddies how to 'block'.
I wonder why it is helmet-to-helmet on a QB or WR is not ok, but any other player is fine.
Nice bullshit call on running into the kicker. Looks like the refs received confirmation of Rooney's payment.
Looks like Hines is teaching his buddies how to 'block'.
I wonder why it is helmet-to-helmet on a QB or WR is not ok, but any other player is fine.
The rule is on a Tackle of a Ball carrier , tacklers and players standing around...on a tackle helmet contact is acceptable, at least across the LOS. I think the rule was to protect Extended players, and players getting blindside blocks and such, QB is Throwing motion and follow up also.... Stop Bitching loser. Pathetic whiney azz crybabies. Pissed again because the Burgh~ has yet another Shot at the Lombardi ! Become a real team Again , then maybe you will stop sounding so freakin Pathetic !!! Its is sad sad how pussified some of you guys are !!!
-
Rich and Ghoolie, even a legit PIT can see it
@yeahdaisafuturehofer... said:
The Holmes incompletion was a good call but the refs refuse to call holding on the B-more o-line and the made up PI call.Masters said:
Rich and Ghoolie, even a legit PIT can see itAdd to that the 1st Pass Interference Call....BS little Sissy call. Pass Interference is only to be called IF the DB received an advantage over the receiver on the play. Clearly the 1st time was BS. The 2nd one (on Taylor) Was a good call. So, Tell me why in the heck That 1st one was interferance and the Last Play the Eagles had the Ball wasn't ???? (in the PHILLY Game)
And anyone crying the "refs" Helped Pittsburgh...what ever You just Identified yourselves as Azzwipes , if that's the Case.
Because IF the Officials were help Pittsburgh NONE of those interference calls get made and Baltimore never even SNIFFS the End Zone !!!!
-
Masters said:
Rich and Ghoolie, even a legit PIT can see itAdd to that the 1st Pass Interference Call....BS little Sissy call. Pass Interference is only to be called IF the DB received an advantage over the receiver on the play. Clearly the 1st time was BS. The 2nd one (on Taylor) Was a good call. So, Tell me why in the heck That 1st one was interferance and the Last Play the Eagles had the Ball wasn't ???? (in the PHILLY Game)
And anyone crying the "refs" Helped Pittsburgh...what ever You just Identified yourselves as Azzwipes , if that's the Case.
Because IF the Officials were help Pittsburgh NONE of those interference calls get made and Baltimore never even SNIFFS the End Zone !!!!
FREAKofSTEEL08 said:
Add to that the 1st Pass Interference Call....BS little Sissy call. Pass Interference is only to be called IF the DB received an advantage over the receiver on the play. Clearly the 1st time was BS. The 2nd one (on Taylor) Was a good call. So, Tell me why in the heck That 1st one was interferance and the Last Play the Eagles had the Ball wasn't ???? (in the PHILLY Game)And anyone crying the "refs" Helped Pittsburgh...what ever You just Identified yourselves as Azzwipes , if that's the Case.
Because IF the Officials were help Pittsburgh NONE of those interference calls get made and Baltimore never even SNIFFS the End Zone !!!!
Not sure why you chose my post to reply with this
I'd agree the 1st PI call was questionable, and that the last in the Eagles game should have been called.
I didn't say the refs helped PIT.
-
NO THE RULES DO NOT SAY THAT.....................
THE RULE SAYS THAT IN LIEU OF THE RECIVER MAKING CONTACT WITH HIS FEET< IF HIS ONLY CONTACT IS THE GROUND.................... THEN HE HAS TO HAVE POSESSION.
IF HE WOULD HAVE RUN 3 STEPS INSTEAD OF 2, OR 10 STEPS................. WHAT WOULD THE CALL BE?
TWO STEPS IN TEH NFL CONSTITUTES A RECEPTION.
THEY BLEW THE CALL.
"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 the ball comes loose on contact with the ground it is INC. If you watched a game more than once a year, you'd know this. Guys get get two feet in hit the ground and lose the ball on ground contact each week and it is INC.
Masters said:
"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 the ball comes loose on contact with the ground it is INC. If you watched a game more than once a year, you'd know this. Guys get get two feet in hit the ground and lose the ball on ground contact each week and it is INC.BOTH FEET Down ...Ball in control.... Santonio caught that one....Period. The Zebras didn't see it that way... But still ...
Another instance , that provess the Officials were not "HELPING " Pittsburgh. If they were THAT WAS Never gonna get overturned.
-
FREAKofSTEEL08 said:
Add to that the 1st Pass Interference Call....BS little Sissy call. Pass Interference is only to be called IF the DB received an advantage over the receiver on the play. Clearly the 1st time was BS. The 2nd one (on Taylor) Was a good call. So, Tell me why in the heck That 1st one was interferance and the Last Play the Eagles had the Ball wasn't ???? (in the PHILLY Game)And anyone crying the "refs" Helped Pittsburgh...what ever You just Identified yourselves as Azzwipes , if that's the Case.
Because IF the Officials were help Pittsburgh NONE of those interference calls get made and Baltimore never even SNIFFS the End Zone !!!!
Not sure why you chose my post to reply with this
I'd agree the 1st PI call was questionable, and that the last in the Eagles game should have been called.
I didn't say the refs helped PIT.
Masters said:
Not sure why you chose my post to reply with this
I'd agree the 1st PI call was questionable, and that the last in the Eagles game should have been called.
I didn't say the refs helped PIT.
wasnt aimed at you Bro... I agreed with your assessment. So i piggybacked ya ! Sorry !
-
Masters said:
"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 the ball comes loose on contact with the ground it is INC. If you watched a game more than once a year, you'd know this. Guys get get two feet in hit the ground and lose the ball on ground contact each week and it is INC.BOTH FEET Down ...Ball in control.... Santonio caught that one....Period. The Zebras didn't see it that way... But still ...
Another instance , that provess the Officials were not "HELPING " Pittsburgh. If they were THAT WAS Never gonna get overturned.
FREAKofSTEEL08 said:
BOTH FEET Down ...Ball in control.... Santonio caught that one....Period. The Zebras didn't see it that way... But still ...Another instance , that provess the Officials were not "HELPING " Pittsburgh. If they were THAT WAS Never gonna get overturned.
But that ain't the rule (I don't agree with the rule, but that is neither here nor there). By what you said, Washington should have had a fumble on PITs first drive. By the rule, the Holmes play is no different than when a guy makes a sideline grab or one in the endzone, has control of the ball while getting two feet down, goes to the ground and loses the ball, and it's called incomplete. They changed the rule about 5 or 6 years ago that made it that after two feet down, if you go to the ground, you must maintain control of the ball when and after hitting the ground.
-
Masters said:
Not sure why you chose my post to reply with this
I'd agree the 1st PI call was questionable, and that the last in the Eagles game should have been called.
I didn't say the refs helped PIT.
wasnt aimed at you Bro... I agreed with your assessment. So i piggybacked ya ! Sorry !
-
If he had stepped out of bounds it was a catch. He made two steps after controlling the ball and lunged for the goal line. It was a stupid call. Did the ground knock the ball out of his hand? Yes But, it was a legal reception before that.
-
If he had stepped out of bounds it was a catch. He made two steps after controlling the ball and lunged for the goal line. It was a stupid call. Did the ground knock the ball out of his hand? Yes But, it was a legal reception before that.
If he had stepped out of bounds it was a catch. He made two steps after controlling the ball and lunged for the goal line. It was a stupid call. Did the ground knock the ball out of his hand? Yes But, it was a legal reception before that.
His two steps were in stride then to the ground. If he went out of bounds the same way and the ball came loose, the call would still be incomplete. The rule is you must maintain control of the ball when you hit the ground after initially making the catch and only getting two feet down before hitting the ground. If your two steps are while running or both just coming down planting after jumping for the ball, it's still your first two feet down.
-
If he had stepped out of bounds it was a catch. He made two steps after controlling the ball and lunged for the goal line. It was a stupid call. Did the ground knock the ball out of his hand? Yes But, it was a legal reception before that.
If he had stepped out of bounds it was a catch. He made two steps after controlling the ball and lunged for the goal line. It was a stupid call. Did the ground knock the ball out of his hand? Yes But, it was a legal reception before that.
Good call glad you are objective enough to understand the rules
-
FREAKofSTEEL08 said:
BOTH FEET Down ...Ball in control.... Santonio caught that one....Period. The Zebras didn't see it that way... But still ...Another instance , that provess the Officials were not "HELPING " Pittsburgh. If they were THAT WAS Never gonna get overturned.
But that ain't the rule (I don't agree with the rule, but that is neither here nor there). By what you said, Washington should have had a fumble on PITs first drive. By the rule, the Holmes play is no different than when a guy makes a sideline grab or one in the endzone, has control of the ball while getting two feet down, goes to the ground and loses the ball, and it's called incomplete. They changed the rule about 5 or 6 years ago that made it that after two feet down, if you go to the ground, you must maintain control of the ball when and after hitting the ground.
Masters said:
But that ain't the rule (I don't agree with the rule, but that is neither here nor there). By what you said, Washington should have had a fumble on PITs first drive. By the rule, the Holmes play is no different than when a guy makes a sideline grab or one in the endzone, has control of the ball while getting two feet down, goes to the ground and loses the ball, and it's called incomplete. They changed the rule about 5 or 6 years ago that made it that after two feet down, if you go to the ground, you must maintain control of the ball when and after hitting the ground.Yes ...But even Simms said that last nite Two Feet Down Ball in Control. Its a Catch. Nobody Knows the actual Rule ya know ! ?
-
Masters said:
But that ain't the rule (I don't agree with the rule, but that is neither here nor there). By what you said, Washington should have had a fumble on PITs first drive. By the rule, the Holmes play is no different than when a guy makes a sideline grab or one in the endzone, has control of the ball while getting two feet down, goes to the ground and loses the ball, and it's called incomplete. They changed the rule about 5 or 6 years ago that made it that after two feet down, if you go to the ground, you must maintain control of the ball when and after hitting the ground.Yes ...But even Simms said that last nite Two Feet Down Ball in Control. Its a Catch. Nobody Knows the actual Rule ya know ! ?
FREAKofSTEEL08 said:
Yes ...But even Simms said that last nite Two Feet Down Ball in Control. Its a Catch. Nobody Knows the actual Rule ya know ! ?Of course Simms also backed off it and agreed with the ref after the ruling. They just keep changing it so much, it's pretty crazy. At least on this rule it's called pretty consitantly. Just happened to be on the Holmes play he was in stride, rather than the catch on the sidelines, endzone, or a guy leaping and it happinging like more commonly seen.
-
FREAKofSTEEL08 said:
Yes ...But even Simms said that last nite Two Feet Down Ball in Control. Its a Catch. Nobody Knows the actual Rule ya know ! ?Of course Simms also backed off it and agreed with the ref after the ruling. They just keep changing it so much, it's pretty crazy. At least on this rule it's called pretty consitantly. Just happened to be on the Holmes play he was in stride, rather than the catch on the sidelines, endzone, or a guy leaping and it happinging like more commonly seen.
Masters said:
Of course Simms also backed off it and agreed with the ref after the ruling. They just keep changing it so much, it's pretty crazy. At least on this rule it's called pretty consitantly. Just happened to be on the Holmes play he was in stride, rather than the catch on the sidelines, endzone, or a guy leaping and it happinging like more commonly seen.Just LOOK at the Replay ...if thats NOT A Catch... Geez...Common Sense says that's a Catch . Dumb NFL bs.... Amazing.
-
Masters said:
Of course Simms also backed off it and agreed with the ref after the ruling. They just keep changing it so much, it's pretty crazy. At least on this rule it's called pretty consitantly. Just happened to be on the Holmes play he was in stride, rather than the catch on the sidelines, endzone, or a guy leaping and it happinging like more commonly seen.Just LOOK at the Replay ...if thats NOT A Catch... Geez...Common Sense says that's a Catch . Dumb NFL bs.... Amazing.
FREAKofSTEEL08 said:
Just LOOK at the Replay ...if thats NOT A Catch... Geez...Common Sense says that's a Catch . Dumb NFL bs.... Amazing.As I have said in several posts, I don't agree with the rule, but it is the rule. At the same token, I am sure you wouldn't have wanted the incompletea pass to Washington on the first drive ruled a fumble (two feet down and control of the ball).
-
By the same token you are wrong again. It was a completion to Holmes blown by the referees and again misread by you. But since you have no clue about simple math, how can one construe you understand that two steps after possession constructs a clear reception .......what follows is either down by contact with the ground or a fumble........a fumble was clearly the case and recovery....or was it down by contact..........that is the question........the bigger issue is
did the recovery occur before or after the endzone
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login