Collie is out cold.

[Azazello1313]

well, everyone else is offering their thoughts....

 

- the contact that knocked him out looks like it was helmet-on-helmet, but they guy wasn't leading with his helmet. it looked like he was trying to lead with his shoulder and the contact with the other safety drove their helmets together.

- after looking at several slomo replays, to me it wasn't a cheap shot, and I don't think it should have been a penalty or a fine. BUT, with the stupid "crackdown" going on, there's no way the officials DON'T throw a flag looking at it real time. can't really blame them too much. I'll be surprised and disappointed if the league levies a fine.

- definitely looked like a catch and fumble to me

- I like the eagles a lot, but those a-holes (esp sims and samuel) running around and gesturing when a guy is out cold on the field made me want to puke. the hit wasn't cheap, but THAT chit sure was.

Edited November 8, 2010 by Azazello1313

[gilthorp]

Hook, I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here. It's getting pretty sad.

[CaptainHook]

i know the call on the field. would three steps with possession qualify as a catch?

I'm pretty sure they removed all mention of needing "feet down" for several years now. Player has to demonstrate posession. Refs deemed he had not. He catches the ball, and his two feet come down simultaneously. As he is taking a step, he is contacted and the ball comes out. I've seen several plays the last few years where the player has his feet down but it's still ruled incomplete.

Edited November 8, 2010 by CaptainHook

[KOKIDKOKID]

Two feet down doesn't make a catch. Hit on the third step. You might want to read the NFL rule and check out the ruling in Week 1 against Calvin Johnson or see the TD reversal today against Arian Foster. Those were plays that looked like catches much more than the Collie play. But by NFL rules, they are not. Reid must have agreed.

I believe the rules for scoring a TD in the endzone (as in what is considered a TD reception) are different than what constitutes a receptionwithin the field of play. In the endzone or falling out of the endzone I believe you must possess the ball all the way to the ground and have two feet down. in the field of play I believe the rule is two feet down and making a "football move"...which I thought Collie had done (just my two cents and I know that is all my opinion is worth).

 

The Foster TD to me should have been a TD. He caught the ball and then crossed over the endzone line (broke the endozone plain) then took at least a step or two into the endzone before touching the ground with the ball and losing possession of it...and in my opinion again...at that point he had made a reception and broken the endzone plain and scored a TD....worst case scenario is it should have been called a FUMBLE (after making a catch) and then since he recovered his own fumble it should have still been a TD.

 

KO'd

[CaptainHook]

Hook, I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here. It's getting pretty sad.

bored. the Packers/Cowboys game stinks.

[CaptainHook]

I believe the rules for scoring a TD in the endzone (as in what is considered a TD reception) are different than what constitutes a receptionwithin the field of play. In the endzone or falling out of the endzone I believe you must possess the ball all the way to the ground and have two feet down. in the field of play I believe the rule is two feet down and making a "football move"...which I thought Collie had done (just my two cents and I know that is all my opinion is worth).

 

The Foster TD to me should have been a TD. He caught the ball and then crossed over the endzone line (broke the endozone plain) then took at least a step or two into the endzone before touching the ground with the ball and losing possession of it...and in my opinion again...at that point he had made a reception and broken the endzone plain and scored a TD....worst case scenario is it should have been called a FUMBLE (after making a catch) and then since he recovered his own fumble it should have still been a TD.

 

KO'd

I believe the rule involves making a catch that involves going to the ground. Both of which were involved in the CJ play and the Foster play today. Although Foster made the catch, was contacted and went to the ground after contact and crossing the goal line. Both those guys demonstrated possession for longer than Collie did, IMO.

[keggerz]

I'm pretty sure they removed all mention of needing "feet down" for several years now. Player has to demonstrate posession. Refs deemed he had not. He catches the ball, and his two feet come down simultaneously. As he is taking a step, he is contacted and the ball comes out.

play a game...rewind and change the players....the colts are on D and DJax is the recvr...you would be here calling it a fumble and not a penalty...and it did look like a catch...ball was secure until the hit...he made a "football move", to cover up for the hit...the hit caused a secure ball (be it bang bang) to come out...reid probably didn't challenge knowing the ref wasn't going to reverse it due to a player laying on the ground injured and looking like he was possibly paralyzed....that or Reid was caught up in the moment and just screwed the pooch by not throwing the flag...we probably won't ever know the answer but in slow mo it did look like a catch.

[KOKIDKOKID]

bored. the Packers/Cowboys game stinks.

Amen to that sir.

 

KO'd

[keggerz]

I believe the rule involves making a catch that involves going to the ground. Both of which were involved in the CJ play and the Foster play today. Although Foster made the catch, was contacted and went to the ground after contact and crossing the goal line. Both those guys demonstrated possession for longer than Collie did, IMO.

ah ha! you admit he had possession!!

[CaptainHook]

ah ha! you admit he had possession!!

He clearly caught the ball. But he didn't maintain it long enough for it to be complete. A lot of plays that are ruled incomplete look like completions in slow motion.

[Ed Hoyle]

Feel the same way seeing Samuels running around like that. Show some class and have some concern for another human being that just got laid out cold regardless of how you feel about the call on the play.

 

 

The hit doesn't deserve a fine. But Samuels' behavior should get one.

[CaptainHook]

The hit doesn't deserve a fine. But Samuels' behavior should get one.

[Bier Meister]

you are using the officials' (cover my ass) ruling to back up your argument. you are not allowing for the possibility of an incorrect ruling.

[CaptainHook]

you are using the officials' (cover my ass) ruling to back up your argument. you are not allowing for the possibility of an incorrect ruling.

That's because they made the correct call.

[keggerz]

He clearly caught the ball. But he didn't maintain it long enough for it to be complete. A lot of plays that are ruled incomplete look like completions in slow motion.

how many feet did he have down? 2?

[CaptainHook]

how many feet did he have down? 2?

I thought he caught it and landed on two feet. As he took a step, he was contacted and the ball came out.

[bushwacked]

Although many of us disagreed throughout this thread. I'd like to congratulate Captain Hook on his ability to be objective.

[Bier Meister]

I thought he caught it and landed on two feet. As he took a step, he was contacted and the ball came out.

 

 

he had another foot down before the ball was loose

[Bier Meister]

Although many of us disagreed throughout this thread. I'd like to congratulate Captain Hook on his ability to be objective.

 

 

[keggerz]

I thought he caught it and landed on two feet. As he took a step, he was contacted and the ball came out.

so you saw something different then the officials did because they are saying the 2nd foot didnt come down because if it had then he would have been considered a runner and not defenseless recvr...and fwiw here is the rule on a "catch" / possession...and i didn't see both feet come down on two feet at the exact same time....one was down before the other and the 3rd step was being made as he was impacted.

 

Article 7 A player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball inbounds

(See 3-2-3).

To gain possession of a loose ball (3-2-3) that has been caught, intercepted, or recovered,

a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet completely on the

ground inbounds or any other part of his body, other than his hands, on the ground inbounds.

If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other

part of his body to the ground or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous,

there is no possession. This rule applies in the field of play and in the end zone.

The terms catch, intercept, recover, advance, and fumble denote player possession (as

distinguished from touching or muffing).

Note 1: A player who goes to the ground in the process of attempting to secure possession

of a loose ball (with or without contact by an opponent) must maintain control of the

ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses

control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, there is no

possession. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, it is a catch,

interception, or recovery.

Note 2: If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent)

in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball at the sideline,

he must retain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the act of falling

to the ground and after hitting the ground, or there is no possession.

Note 3: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered

loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has

been a loss of possession.

A catch is made when a player inbounds secures possession of a pass, kick, or fumble in

flight (See 8-1-3).

Note 1: It is a catch if in the process of attempting to catch the ball, a player secures control

of the ball prior to the ball touching the ground and that control is maintained after the

ball has touched the ground.

Note 2: In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, and there is

contact by a defender causing the ball to come loose before the runner is down by

contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a

touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goal line prior to the loss

of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.

Edited November 8, 2010 by keggerz

[KOKIDKOKID]

I believe the rule involves making a catch that involves going to the ground. Both of which were involved in the CJ play and the Foster play today. Although Foster made the catch, was contacted and went to the ground after contact and crossing the goal line. Both those guys demonstrated possession for longer than Collie did, IMO.

I need to see that Foster play again because I don't recall if he was actually contacted by a defensive player or not...if he was I get it I guess although I don't quite get how that still wouldn't be a TD or at worst a fumble then caused by "contact". Just some strange rules regarding TD's - a dude can stretch his arm over the goal and score without any part of his body ever touching the endzne and even get the ball stripped but if he breaks the plain even for an instant that is a TD...but catch a ball and fricking run it into the endzone and then touch it to the ground and that is not a TD. Bizarre.

 

KO'd

[gilthorp]

BAH!

[CaptainHook]

Although many of us disagreed throughout this thread. I'd like to congratulate Captain Hook on his ability to be objective.

From you all right? I learned it from watching you!

[CaptainHook]

so you saw something different then the officials did because they are saying the 2nd foot didnt come down because if it had then he would have been considered a runner and not defenseless recvr...and fwiw here is the rule on a "catch" / possession...and i didn't see both feet come down on two feet at the exact same time....one was down before the other and the 3rd step was being made as he was impacted.

 

Article 7 A player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball inbounds

(See 3-2-3).

To gain possession of a loose ball (3-2-3) that has been caught, intercepted, or recovered,

a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet completely on the

ground inbounds or any other part of his body, other than his hands, on the ground inbounds.

If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other

part of his body to the ground or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous,

there is no possession. This rule applies in the field of play and in the end zone.

The terms catch, intercept, recover, advance, and fumble denote player possession (as

distinguished from touching or muffing).

Note 1: A player who goes to the ground in the process of attempting to secure possession

of a loose ball (with or without contact by an opponent) must maintain control of the

ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses

control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, there is no

possession. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, it is a catch,

interception, or recovery.

Note 2: If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent)

in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball at the sideline,

he must retain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the act of falling

to the ground and after hitting the ground, or there is no possession.

Note 3: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered

loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has

been a loss of possession.

A catch is made when a player inbounds secures possession of a pass, kick, or fumble in

flight (See 8-1-3).

Note 1: It is a catch if in the process of attempting to catch the ball, a player secures control

of the ball prior to the ball touching the ground and that control is maintained after the

ball has touched the ground.

Note 2: In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, and there is

contact by a defender causing the ball to come loose before the runner is down by

contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a

touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goal line prior to the loss

of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.

What's your point? By those rules, Calvin Johnson and Arian Foster clearly had possession. Why were those ruled incomplete?

[Bier Meister]

What's your point? By those rules, Calvin Johnson and Arian Foster clearly had possession. Why were those ruled incomplete?

 

field of play vs ez