That Indy catch - New England Patriots Forums

OldEnglandPatriot · 10-05-2008, 10:56 PM

I freely admit I hate the Colts and think that right now they are the luckiest 2-2 team in football.

But anyway: am I completely off-base in feeling that that game-winning Reggie Wayne catch was a little dubious? Was it right that he was judged to be in control of the ball when he only had one hand on it the entire way to the ground ?

***SoCal Pmen*** · 10-05-2008, 10:58 PM

It was the right call. He made the catch and had control.

Ishdul · 10-05-2008, 11:00 PM

He didn't bobble the ball at all from what I saw.

***Joker*** · 10-05-2008, 11:01 PM

yeah...he did have the ball firmly held even though it was one hand...I thought it was his foot landing half out of bounds that would overturn it, but they ruled he caught the ball with one hand and had two feet in just before that...tough call...who knows...another crew chief might see it another way...still a clutch play and a HORRIBLE choke job by Parsley Sage Rosemary and Thyme

***HEY BRO! WHAT UP?*** · 10-06-2008, 01:43 AM

I just think the Sage Rosenfels may be the dumbest QB in NFL history. You have seventeen point lead and Rosenfels suddenly thinks he John Elway. All he had to do is slide and the game would have been over. The Colts may have escaped that loss but it will catch up to them, it always does. The Colts are not very good this year.

Cartwright · 10-06-2008, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THEARCHIVES

I just think the Sage Rosenfels may be the dumbest QB in NFL history. You have seventeen point lead and Rosenfels suddenly thinks he John Elway. All he had to do is slide and the game would have been over. The Colts may have escaped that loss but it will catch up to them, it always does. The Colts are not very good this year.

A slide and it's 4th down. A punt would have been preferred though. But still plenty of time left. Much more difficult task, but no way he's close to the first if he slides.

Fixit · 10-06-2008, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldEnglandPatriot

I freely admit I hate the Colts and think that right now they are the luckiest 2-2 team in football.

But anyway: am I completely off-base in feeling that that game-winning Reggie Wayne catch was a little dubious? Was it right that he was judged to be in control of the ball when he only had one hand on it the entire way to the ground ?

Please. That was a great catch. The only reason I was yelling at my TV is because it took Dierdorf like six replays to realize that the knee was irrelevant, seeing as he got two feet down. He had 100% control.

OldEnglandPatriot · 10-06-2008, 10:45 AM

Hmm. He had some control of the ball certainly, but 100%? You don't think he could have dropped the ball on his way to ground with just one hand on it?

I admit I'm often confused by the way this rule is interpreted from game to game, day to day. It seems odd to me that a player with one hand on the ball is judged to have full control, while players who have the ball trapped between their hand/arm and body or sometimes even have two hands on the ball are often ruled not to have such control - though it seems to me that players in the latter cases have less likelihood of relinquishing the ball.

***ALP*** · 10-06-2008, 02:03 PM

lol...

its regie wayne...

if it was randy moss, greg jennigns, brandon marshall, terrel owens same things would have been called

if it were a no name reciever...i think it may have gone the other way

Fixit · 10-06-2008, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldEnglandPatriot

Hmm. He had some control of the ball certainly, but 100%? You don't think he could have dropped the ball on his way to ground with just one hand on it?

I admit I'm often confused by the way this rule is interpreted from game to game, day to day. It seems odd to me that a player with one hand on the ball is judged to have full control, while players who have the ball trapped between their hand/arm and body or sometimes even have two hands on the ball are often ruled not to have such control - though it seems to me that players in the latter cases have less likelihood of relinquishing the ball.

It's irrelevant whether or not they might relinquish control. If they get two feet in and keep control all the way to the ground, it's a catch. It would have been ruled an incompletion if he'd bobbled it, but it didn't move. It might as well have been glued to his hand.