ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
They got a little payback, the PF on Wilfolk was awful also, he was push in the back into Johnson, should have been a penalty against the Vikes.
__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."
My understanding of the rule is that if a receiver (or a defender who attempts an interception) is in the process of being tackled before he legally completes the catch, then he must maintain possession all the way to the ground IF (but only if) the tackle is ultimately made by the player who started the tackle.
This is a new official example given in the rule book, I believe, after the Troy Palamalu play last year. This is impossible to confirm, though, since it's very difficult to actually find the NFL rules on line (as opposed to the nfl's lame "digest," which does not give the approved situational rulings).
In other words, as usual, Theisman has no idea what he is talking about, although it appears Bill Belichick knew the rule and educated the official about it.
So, in a nutshell, if you catch the ball and get two feet down with possession before a defender starts to tackle you, the ref must apply the infamous "football move" rule. If, however, before you get both feet down with possession, a defender STARTS to make a tackle, that the defender then completes, you must maintain possession throughout the tackle, all the way to the ground. It does not matter whether you have taken two steps or ten steps or made two football moves or ten football moves.
The only issues in calling that play correctly are (1) Was the tackle in progress BEFORE the receiver got two feet down and had possesion and (2) did he maintain possession through the tacke. On 1, clearly yes. On 2 clearly no -- in fact, Wiggins lost the ball before his knee hit the ground. No catch. Easy call. Easy to uphold on replay, which is why they did. This is one of those situations where the officials know the rules better than the announcers or Joe Public, and they call it correctly. You may not like the rule -- like the tuck rule -- but it's the rule.
I actually think it's a good rule. It's a possession protection, and offense protection, rule. The rule is primarily designed to avoid calling a fumble in that situation, which is what it would have been there but for the rule (albeit a fumble out of bounds). The idea is that the NFL wants it clear -- either it's a catch or not, and a ball that pops out in the course of a tackle of a receiver is not a fumble.
In short, that rule is designed to protect possession for the offensive team -- it was supposed to be there to help the vikings, but it didn't work out that way since the fumble went out of bounds, but if a patriot had picked up that ball, the rule would have meant not turnover -- just an incomplete pass.
Last edited by PatsFaninAZ; 10-30-2006 at 10:36 PM..
FWIW-all the good calls/bad calls for each respective team gets evened out as the season goes along.
Bottom line is that the refs have the toughest job on the field-it's no different from a coach making a bad play call, or even a DB blowing an assignment.
My understanding of the rule is that if a receiver (or a defender who attempts an interception) is in the process of being tackled before he legally completes the catch, then he must maintain possession all the way to the ground IF (but only if) the tackle is ultimately made by the player who started the tackle.
This is a new official example given in the rule book, I believe, after the Troy Palamalu play last year. This is impossible to confirm, though, since it's very difficult to actually find the NFL rules on line (as opposed to the nfl's lame "digest," which does not give the approved situational rulings).
In other words, as usual, Theisman has no idea what he is talking about, although it appears Bill Belichick knew the rule and educated the official about it.
So, in a nutshell, if you catch the ball and get two feet down with possession before a defender starts to tackle you, the ref must apply the infamous "football move" rule. If, however, before you get both feet down with possession, a defender STARTS to make a tackle, that the defender then completes, you must maintain possession throughout the tackle, all the way to the ground. It does not matter whether you have taken two steps or ten steps or made two football moves or ten football moves.
The only issues in calling that play correctly are (1) Was the tackle in progress BEFORE the receiver got two feet down and had possesion and (2) did he maintain possession through the tacke. On 1, clearly yes. On 2 clearly no -- in fact, Wiggins lost the ball before his knee hit the ground. No catch. Easy call. Easy to uphold on replay, which is why they did. This is one of those situations where the officials know the rules better than the announcers or Joe Public, and they call it correctly. You may not like the rule -- like the tuck rule -- but it's the rule.
I actually think it's a good rule. It's a possession protection, and offense protection, rule. The rule is primarily designed to avoid calling a fumble in that situation, which is what it would have been there but for the rule (albeit a fumble out of bounds). The idea is that the NFL wants it clear -- either it's a catch or not, and a ball that pops out in the course of a tackle of a receiver is not a fumble.
In short, that rule is designed to protect possession for the offensive team -- it was supposed to be there to help the vikings, but it didn't work out that way since the fumble went out of bounds, but if a patriot had picked up that ball, the rule would have meant not turnover -- just an incomplete pass.
I am impressed.
I also don't think there were going to be any Minny fans showing up here today either way.
I missed the offensive pass interference call that was said to be bad, I was in the kitchen at the time.
The Wiggins catch, as has been said, the two feel down is irrelevant, the "football move" is the relevant issue. As I don't know exactly what constitutes a "football move", it's hard for me to comment.
A pass interference on Samuel against Williamson would have been a travesty. That was closer to offensive interference although I wouldn't have called it either way.
My understanding of the rule is that if a receiver (or a defender who attempts an interception) is in the process of being tackled before he legally completes the catch, then he must maintain possession all the way to the ground IF (but only if) the tackle is ultimately made by the player who started the tackle.
That was a horrid call (to Minny Fans)
Linear Mode
