OT: Lions Fan Rant on Johnson TD Reversal
 

Highly entertaining. Be careful, this is considerably more profane than your average conversation with Fat Rex.

YouTube - ***** THE NFL IM NOT PAYING OR WATCHING ANY MORE GAMES LIONS CALVIN JOHNSON ROBBED

Re: OT: Lions Fan Rant on Johnson TD Reversal
 

I think it is an unfortunate play, and think the rule is abit c**p!

Why doesn't it usually matter if a player goes down, and doesn't come up with the ball, but in the endzone it does!

Re: OT: Lions Fan Rant on Johnson TD Reversal
 

The moment the receiver has posession with 2 feet on the ground (or 1 knee) the "process" should be complete. That was how it always was but they changed the rule last year, it should be changed back.

Re: OT: Lions Fan Rant on Johnson TD Reversal
 

Wow. You show that play to 1000 fans, and all 1000 will tell you thats a touchdown. Every time. Detroit got robbed (and thats not cause I had them picked to upset), seriously, how isn't that a touchdown? Cause he can hold the ball with one hand and braced himself with the other as he went down after getting two feet in bounds? Lions got porked, no lube. Too bad, they could use any break they can get after the last decade or three (okay, maybe outside of Barry...).

Re: OT: Lions Fan Rant on Johnson TD Reversal
 

The lions got robbed the same way the Raiders did during the Tuck Rule Game. By a rule.

The Raiders didn't do anything to rectify it because they couldn't. Their season was over. The Eagles have to go into Detroit and play the Lions who should have beaten the Bears on the road. The Lions now can show us what they're made of. I wouldn't want to be the Eagles next week.

Re: OT: Lions Fan Rant on Johnson TD Reversal
 

It may be the rule, but it does not mean that it makes sense. I'd call the tuck play a fumble, but am certainly not complaining the call got reversed (tho it meant I watched the rest of the game jacket/shirtless...and I wasn't anywhere near the legal drinking age so alcohol was not involved :( ) Same goes for this play. Now the ones where the reciever is making his best Santonio re-enactment (toe tapping as falling out of bounds) yeah, it makes sense that he needs to keep possession through the act of hitting the ground blah blah blah. But on that play? Seriously, you could almost make the argument that he was using the "ball-hand" to push himself up as he ran around the back of the endzone celebrating. There should be some wiggle-rooms for refs for plays like that. Call it the sniff test...if the by-the-book nitpicky interpretation of the rule makes the call stink like poo...the hell with the nitpicky interpretation, go with the gut.

Re: OT: Lions Fan Rant on Johnson TD Reversal
 

It always matters. When a player gets hit in the air, he has to maintain possesion when he goes to the ground. CJ didn't do that.

Re: OT: Lions Fan Rant on Johnson TD Reversal
 

No, you can't make that argument. Thats exactly what I though the first time I saw it, but watch it again on nfl.com.

He hits the ground, rolls, the ball smacks on the ground and pops out. He never has control. He didn't let go of the ball. The ball hit the ground as he was falling and popped out.


He, at no point, is on the ground with control of the ball.

Re: OT: Lions Fan Rant on Johnson TD Reversal
 

No, the play was over when CJ had his ass o. The ground, nevermind the feet
At the point when he sits down the ball is firmly in his hand, play over, TD

Then he doesn't drop the ball, he places the ball down while turning around to go to the fans inthe endzone

No story here really, just that NFL officials suck

Re: OT: Lions Fan Rant on Johnson TD Reversal
 

He was in control the entire way. Two feet down (in fact, he took a full step and put a 3rd down), knee down, elbow down = Possession. It's honestly no different than if someone had run a 100 yard touchdown back and jumped over the goal-line and the ball pops out when it hits the ground (like Guyton's INT return), for instance. It isn't even contemplated whether that is a fumble or not, its a TD. In this case, he caught the ball, came down with it, stepped again. He had possession. At that point, he could throw it into the stands, launched it into the air, it shouldn't matter what happens next.

I don't even think the refs are interpreting the rule correctly here. He caught the ball. Then he started to fall. They need to separate the two actions. I understand what they THINK they called.