CaptainHook Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 From my vantage point, Faulk clearly bobbled the ball, which is the key to the spot. Does he lose ALL forward progress once there is a bobble? We're gonna need a rulebook, I think. If he catches it cleanly, it's definitely a first down. But he doesn't bobble it much. He does regain control, but by rule, does the forward progress not start at that point? 'Cause it is CLOSE. The ref was right there, and immediately signaled the bobble, but WOW! What balls to spot the ball there. I still have no idea why they measured. If the ball starts at the 20, the line to gain is obviously the 30, and the ball was not on the 30. Dramatic effect I suppose? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle2003 Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 The same thing happened in the Eagles / Cowboys game. The receiver bobbled the ball and didn't get forward progress. The Head of Officiating went over the rule on the NFL Network. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 From my vantage point, Faulk clearly bobbled the ball, which is the key to the spot. Does he lose ALL forward progress once there is a bobble? We're gonna need a rulebook, I think. If he catches it cleanly, it's definitely a first down. But he doesn't bobble it much. He does regain control, but by rule, does the forward progress not start at that point? 'Cause it is CLOSE. The ref was right there, and immediately signaled the bobble, but WOW! What balls to spot the ball there. I still have no idea why they measured. If the ball starts at the 20, the line to gain is obviously the 30, and the ball was not on the 30. Dramatic effect I suppose? Â the announcers made it clear that if there is a bobble, there is no forward progress and the ball is spotted where the player is ruled down. so if that is indeed the case, the officials were spot on and it would not have been reversed, imo. Â now, were the announcers correct? i don't know that for sure ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 It is not considered a catch until he has full control of the ball, and forward progress can't start before that. So forward progress began once he had full control of the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 It is not considered a catch until he has full control of the ball, and forward progress can't start before that. So forward progress began once he had full control of the ball. That is my question, he gains control and it is very close to the 30 at that point. You're saying forward progress starts there? Others are saying you get no forward progress at all after a bobble . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 That is my question, he gains control and it is very close to the 30 at that point. You're saying forward progress starts there? Others are saying you get no forward progress at all after a bobble . . . He first touched the ball ahead the 30 but was bobbling it and going backwards. He first gained full control of the ball prior to the 30 and that is where forward progress began. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdrudge Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 From my vantage point, Faulk clearly bobbled the ball, which is the key to the spot. Does he lose ALL forward progress once there is a bobble? We're gonna need a rulebook, I think. If he catches it cleanly, it's definitely a first down. But he doesn't bobble it much. He does regain control, but by rule, does the forward progress not start at that point?If he caught it cleanly, took a step or two or otherwise made a football move, then I think they could have gave him forward progress. But since he didn't have secure posession of the ball, the point of first contact doesn't count. Once he secured it, then that is where forward progress should be marked from. If you look at the video here at the 5:27 mark, his foot is clearly on the near side of the white line when he brings the ball to his chest so the earliest he could have possession is just before the line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 That is my question, he gains control and it is very close to the 30 at that point. You're saying forward progress starts there? Others are saying you get no forward progress at all after a bobble . . . Â Forward progress starts when he has full control of the ball AND is contacted by a defended. Once both happen, that point is where the ball should be marked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 (edited) regardless, you have to give the ref (or line judge, I guess) credit for being clear and decisive with the ruling. it would have seemed less legitimate if they had to huddle and discuss it. but no, dude made the bobble motion instantly, and spotted it decisively. he wasn't all like "what do you guys think?" with the other officials like those guys do so often. good officiating. Edited November 16, 2009 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 It was a good call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 (edited) With no horse in that race... When I saw it live, I thought he had the 1st down. However, the live camera angle is just off enough that its difficult to see exactly where the catch begins in relation to the plane of the first down to count forward progress. After watching the replay, I agree his possession started before the 30 yard line. I think the ref got it right. Edited November 16, 2009 by The Irish Doggy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 regardless, you have to give the ref (or line judge, I guess) credit for being clear and decisive with the ruling. it would have seemed less legitimate if they had to huddle and discuss it. but no, dude made the bobble motion instantly, and spotted it decisively. he wasn't all like "what do you guys think?" with the other officials like those guys do so often. good officiating. Â Â +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 From my vantage point, Faulk clearly bobbled the ball, which is the key to the spot. Does he lose ALL forward progress once there is a bobble? We're gonna need a rulebook, I think. If he catches it cleanly, it's definitely a first down. But he doesn't bobble it much. He does regain control, but by rule, does the forward progress not start at that point? 'Cause it is CLOSE. The ref was right there, and immediately signaled the bobble, but WOW! What balls to spot the ball there. I still have no idea why they measured. If the ball starts at the 20, the line to gain is obviously the 30, and the ball was not on the 30. Dramatic effect I suppose? Â I thought the spot was really bad. Almost a full yard shy of where it should have been. Where it looked like Faulk had control would have been a spot worth measuring. Not necessarily a first down, but at least worth bringing the chains out. Â Regardless...anyone that wants to blame the loss on the spot or on that play in particular is forgetting about 47 minutes and 20 seconds worth of football. The pats turned the ball over in the endzone twice. Â And much, much worse than the spot was the 37 yard pass interference call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 (edited) No way he had another yard. No way. Â I think it could have been spotted a little closer to the 30 yard line (which was the line to gain, since the drive started on the 20 due to a touchback). But no way he had another full yard, due to the bobble. Â I guess my question is this: Â Does the bobble force the ref to spot the ball where the receiver is DOWN, voiding ANY forward progress? Or can you bobble it, regain posession and forward progress can be applied again? Â I thought it looked like the ref spotted the ball where Faulk was down, and gave him no forward progress at all. If that's the rule, then the spot is 100% correct. Â If you have to apply forward progress to where he gains control, it was much, much closer. Regardless, due to the camera angle, I don't think it would have been overturned on replay. Edited November 16, 2009 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 And much, much worse than the spot was the 37 yard pass interference call. I don't agree here either. Collie slowed down to catch an underthrown pass. The defender never turned around to find the ball and plowed into him. I've seen that called repeatedly this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 I understand that. But how does the bobble factor in according to NFL rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 (edited) Â Did you see the 4th and 2 play last night? That's the one I'm talking about. Â By the way, the "football move" thing has not been in the rules for at least 2 years now . . . Edited November 16, 2009 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 Nothing you are saying applies to that play or my question. You are just typing rules from 2 years ago. . . that's why I'm confused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 I don't agree here either. Collie slowed down to catch an underthrown pass. The defender never turned around to find the ball and plowed into him. I've seen that called repeatedly this year. That's how I saw it as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilfish2 Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 "the spot" - about a half an index finger in - and move toward the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 I'll answer Captain. Â The bobble per se has/had nothing to do with it (the ruling)- other than causing posession to be maintained a split second later, which turned out to be all that was needed in this case. Possession was established in the air after the bobble (for purposes of forward progress), and yes, the spot probably should have been up just a bit. Not 1st down material, but a tad bit closer to the 30. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 I thought the spot on Faulk's catch was terrible, and I was pulling for the Colts. As I watched the play, the ref on the near side of the field started running towards the spot where Faulk was tackled, basically. The ref coming from the far side ran towards a spot much closer to where forward progress would have been (had Faulk not bobbled the ball)... the two were at least two full yards apart. I expected the actual spot to come out somewhere in the middle, but it looked to me like they ended up spotting the ball around where he was tackled... worst-case scenario for NE. It almost looked like they were determined to spot the ball short, no matter where he actually caught the ball. There wasn't even a need for a measurement, given where they spotted the ball, but I think it was actually much closer than that. In fact, the bobble wasn't much of one at all... Faulk looked like he had that ball secured well before he was tackled, at least a full yard ahead of where they ended up spotting it. Â Like I said, I was pulling for Indy, and thought the call to go for it was HORRIBLE, so this is just a "side note" of sorts. But, considering that people will be talking about the call (to go for it by BB) for probably the rest of the season, it's unfortunate that the ball wasn't spotted where it should have been, IMO. Â Edit: It seemed like the consensus was to spot the ball where the ref who couldn't see the ball thought it should be, rather than the one who would have had a much better view of the play, due to the fact that Faulk's back wasn't turned towards him, like it was to the near-side judge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pig devilz Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 i didnt even read this entire thread, don't have to. i dvr'd the game, it was the right call. very close, but imo the right call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 (edited) Almost always, the spot will come from the nearside linesman, but I agree with what you are saying about him not being able to see the football for a split second due to his back being to him. I had a very similar angle from my seat. The "bobble" looked much worse from my angle. When I saw it on TV, I was surprised how slight it was. Â I think the ball probably should have been spotted closer to the 30 yard line that it was, but don't think replay could have changed it because of the angle. Â edit to add: I watched it again, the far-side lineman was NOT coming in with a spot. It's not his job. Where he was standing was NOT where he thought the ball should be spotted. He wasn't coming in on a straight line, he was just kinda walking to the area. Edited November 17, 2009 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 By the way, I agree that it probably wouldn't have made a difference. I was just shocked by where they spotted the ball, considering where Faulk appeared to establish possession of the ball, even after the bobble. Whether or not he bobbled the ball has nothing to do with whether or not forward progress was established. Faulk established possession somewhere between where he initially touched the ball, and where he hits the ground. The spot looked much closer to where he hit the ground than to where he gained control of the ball. Had it been spotted more accurately, it would have at least justified a measurement... where they spotted it didn't even just ify that, as it wasn't even close to the 30. It was almost like "reverse forward progress"... in other words, just spot the ball at the furthest point back as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.