Collie is out cold.

[CaptainHook]

Got news for ya' bub. If the league thinks the hit was illegal, he will be fined. As big a deal as they have made about head shots they have no choice. If they choose not to fine him, it means they don't think the hit was illegal. I agree with you that I doubt they actually come and say it, but if they don't levy a fine, what they're saying is that the official did the best he could under the circumstances, but he blew the call.

Not every personal foul call gets fined bub. Doesn't make them bad calls.

[CaptainHook]

Again, what the hell does that have to do with your argument that since Reid didn't challenge it, that means it was legal?

huh?

[STL Fan]

Not every personal foul call gets fined bub. Doesn't make them bad calls.

 

Not every personal foul has been made a point of emphasis on every media outlet for two weeks. They said head-to-head shots will be fined or even suspended, regardless of whether or not a flag was even thrown.

[CaptainHook]

Not every personal foul has been made a point of emphasis on every media outlet for two weeks. They said head-to-head shots will be fined or even suspended, regardless of whether or not a flag was even thrown.

I think they said egregious hits will be. This was clearly not intentional. But still a penalty. Understand yet?

[jbran23]

Hook, what in the world do you think a guy has to do in order to show possession???

 

Collie caught the ball, landed on two feet, turned his entire body upfield and took another step, had time to realize he was going to get blasted so he put his head down and covered the ball with both arms, and then got knocked the F out. That doesnt sound like a defenseless receiver nor an incomplete pass to me.

 

P.S. I was amazed to see this thread was still going on today. I thought this was a pretty cut and dried discussion to last 12 pages.

[CaptainHook]

Hook, what in the world do you think a guy has to do in order to show possession???

 

Collie caught the ball, landed on two feet, turned his entire body upfield and took another step, had time to realize he was going to get blasted so he put his head down and covered the ball with both arms, and then got knocked the F out. That doesnt sound like a defenseless receiver nor an incomplete pass to me.

He never turned his body. He landed, and as he was taking his first step after catching the ball, gets hit. Incomplete.

 

Like I said, I'd like to see the NFL rules on what they consider "defenseless." Plus, I've seen this ruled the same way in other games, so I'm not surprised it was ruled incomplete again here.

[STL Fan]

He never turned his body. He landed, and as he was taking his first step after catching the ball, gets hit. Incomplete.

 

Like I said, I'd like to see the NFL rules on what they consider "defenseless." Plus, I've seen this ruled the same way in other games, so I'm not surprised it was ruled incomplete again here.

 

First step? He was on his third step when he got it, after pulling the ball in to his chest, covering it with his other arm, and lowering his own head (to use as a weapon?) in anticipation of the contact. And a blown call in other games does not make another one OK. You're not still talking about things like the Johnson non-catch are you?

[CaptainHook]

First step? He was on his third step when he got it, after pulling the ball in to his chest, covering it with his other arm, and lowering his own head (to use as a weapon?) in anticipation of the contact. And a blown call in other games does not make another one OK. You're not still talking about things like the Johnson non-catch are you?

No. He caught the ball in the air. Landed on two feet, and went to take his first step.

[CaptainHook]

Please watch this

.

 

Clark had three feet down here too. Here was the ruling:

 

2-8-IND 14 (3:33) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass to D.Clark to IND 38 for 24 yards (J.Lynch). FUMBLES (J.Lynch), recovered by IND-R.Wayne at IND 38. R.Wayne to DEN 41 for 21 yards (K.Kennedy). FUMBLES (K.Kennedy), RECOVERED by DEN-K.Herndon at DEN 41. K.Herndon for 59 yards, TOUCHDOWN. Play Challenged by IND and REVERSED. (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete to D.Clark (J.Lynch). PENALTY on DEN-J.Lynch, Personal Foul, 15 yards, enforced at IND 14 - No Play.

 

NFL came out the next week, said it was the right call. Fined Lynch.

[CaptainHook]

You're not still talking about things like the Johnson non-catch are you?

Not right now, no. Are you slow? But the NFL has clarified what constitutes a catch over the years. That came into play here.

[jbran23]

He never turned his body.

 

You need to go back and watch the replay a few more times then. He turns his body to catch the pass and then turns his upper body back upfield after securing the ball and squares his shoulders for contact. Its pretty evident.

[CaptainHook]

You need to go back and watch the replay a few more times then. He turns his body to catch the pass and then turns his upper body back upfield after securing the ball and squares his shoulders for contact. Its pretty evident.

He didn't have it long enough to be a completion.

Edited November 8, 2010 by CaptainHook

[jbran23]

You have taken your stance and stuck by it for 12 pages so there is no way you can change your opinion now at this point but I think on the inside, you know it was a bad call.

[bushwacked]

You have taken your stance and stuck by it for 12 pages so there is no way you can change your opinion now at this point but I think on the inside, you know it was a bad call.

 

I think that sometimes homerism runs so deep in some people, they completely lose objectivity. It should be pretty obvious that your wrong when no-one else agrees with you.

[CaptainHook]

You have taken your stance and stuck by it for 12 pages so there is no way you can change your opinion now at this point but I think on the inside, you know it was a bad call.

No, my insides think it was the correct call as well. You may not like the rule. That is worth discussing. But by the rules, it is a penalty.

[STL Fan]

Please watch this

.

 

Clark had three feet down here too. Here was the ruling:

 

2-8-IND 14 (3:33) (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass to D.Clark to IND 38 for 24 yards (J.Lynch). FUMBLES (J.Lynch), recovered by IND-R.Wayne at IND 38. R.Wayne to DEN 41 for 21 yards (K.Kennedy). FUMBLES (K.Kennedy), RECOVERED by DEN-K.Herndon at DEN 41. K.Herndon for 59 yards, TOUCHDOWN. Play Challenged by IND and REVERSED. (Shotgun) J.Sorgi pass incomplete to D.Clark (J.Lynch). PENALTY on DEN-J.Lynch, Personal Foul, 15 yards, enforced at IND 14 - No Play.

 

NFL came out the next week, said it was the right call. Fined Lynch.

 

Lynch made a typical cheap shot on that play and was fined, as he should have been. The reason it was reversed was because you can't have a change of possession on a penalty. It was not ruled incomplete because Clark didn't have it long enough, It was reversed because Lynch was head-hunting and a penalty was called, changing the fumble to an incomplete pass. Should have probably been ruled a completion and a dead ball and had 15 yards added to the end of the play for the personal foul. If you don't see a difference in the hit Clark got and the one Collie got, you're hopeless.

[Azazello1313]

If that's your best argument, you lose.

 

everybody but captain ahab here knew that several pages ago.

[CaptainHook]

Lynch made a typical cheap shot on that play and was fined, as he should have been. The reason it was reversed was because you can't have a change of possession on a penalty. It was not ruled incomplete because Clark didn't have it long enough, It was reversed because Lynch was head-hunting and a penalty was called, changing the fumble to an incomplete pass. Should have probably been ruled a completion and a dead ball and had 15 yards added to the end of the play for the personal foul. If you don't see a difference in the hit Clark got and the one Collie got, you're hopeless.

And you know this how? I actually watched this game and paid attention to what the NFL said afterwards.

 

I really am beginning to think you are stupid. I said earlier THAT THE HITS were not the same, but Clark had the ball just as long, and it was ruled incomplete after replay. The NFL defended that ruling. But you think it should be changed too? You are hopeless. Obviously the rules on a "defenseless" receiver come into play here. I have now provided two examples of the NFL ruling the EXACT same way. Once again, we can argue whether it's a good rule. But the NFL has consistently called those type of plays incomplete.

Edited November 8, 2010 by CaptainHook

[STL Fan]

everybody but captain ahab here knew that several pages ago.

 

You're right. Sometimes I can't help myself and get dragged into these things.

[STL Fan]

And you know this how? I actually watched this game and paid attention to what the NFL said afterwards.

 

I really am beginning to think you are stupid. I said earlier THAT THE HITS were not the same, but Clark had the ball just as long, and it was ruled incomplete after replay. The NFL defended that ruling. But you think it should be changed too? You are hopeless.

 

So now I and presumably everyone else here who agrees with me (which is everyone, BTW) is stupid. I honestly thought that no matter how many times you were proven wrong, you wouldn't resort to name-calling. Have a nice life, Skippy, you are no longer worthy of my time.

[CaptainHook]

So now I and presumably everyone else here who agrees with me (which is everyone, BTW) is stupid. I honestly thought that no matter how many times you were proven wrong, you wouldn't resort to name-calling. Have a nice life, Skippy, you are no longer worthy of my time.

You were obviously not reading what I was writing. You were putting words in my mouth. I was beginning to wonder what was wrong with ya. Once again, I did not call everyone stupid. Just you, because you said I wasn't noting the difference between the hits. I was. I said it repeatedly. I was using the John Lynch play as a comparison of possession. Both times the NFL ruled the same way. Not paying attention again.

Edited November 8, 2010 by CaptainHook

[STL Fan]

So now I and presumably everyone else here who agrees with me (which is everyone, BTW) is stupid. I honestly thought that no matter how many times you were proven wrong, you wouldn't resort to name-calling. Have a nice life, Skippy, you are no longer worthy of my time.

[CaptainHook]

why do you keep coming back?

 

Edit: and for the record, I have not been proven wrong. Everything I have said so far the NFL has agreed with. And Andy Reid apparently agreed with. Or he'd have challenged.

Edited November 8, 2010 by CaptainHook

[Chief Dick]

Edit: and for the record, I have not been proven wrong. Everything I have said so far the NFL has agreed with. And Andy Reid apparently agreed with. Or he'd have challenged.

 

Are you sure?

[MustOfBeenDrunk]

Who's on 1st. ?

No who is on 2nd.

What's on 1s.t