Welcome to PatsFans.com

Do you Hate the Rule "Didn't make a Football Move"

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by brady199, Jul 23, 2007.

?

Do You Hate The "Football Move" Rule

  1. yes

    34 vote(s)
    82.9%
  2. no

    7 vote(s)
    17.1%
  1. brady199

    brady199 Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    1,474
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -1

    I was watching the chargers pats game on NFL NETWORK and a couple of times we should have had turnovers if it wasn't for the "Football Move" Rule.

    I personally Hate it, I think it's a tough call to make with too much grey area.
    and I think the Game is more exciting with quick hits and fumbles, and the Defenses are already suffering from so many rule changes.

    I thought on Pats all Access, they said that rule was going to change, but I'm not really sure.

    Does anyone no for sure?
     
  2. brady199

    brady199 Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    1,474
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -1

    I think a Catch and two feet down, everything is fair game.

    Does anyone know the college rule for this type of play?
     
  3. BradfordPatsFan

    BradfordPatsFan In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,525
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Yes. I've officiated several sports and the more vague the terms, the more problems you have. Define it so there is no grey area.
     
  4. richpats

    richpats Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    3,499
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Actually I think it's a good rule.
     
  5. RayClay

    RayClay Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    18,611
    Likes Received:
    293
    Ratings:
    +774 / 6 / -10

    #75 Jersey

    I totally agree.

    What the hell is a "football move"?

    Make a rule that's enforceable. I've seen guys come down and start running and it's ruled no football move.

    He's not running to catch a bus. Ridiculous. Good thread.
     
  6. Patsfanin Philly

    Patsfanin Philly Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    6,759
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +70 / 0 / -0

    #95 Jersey

    I guess that explains the "unnatural act" Light (?) got flagged for a few years ago........
     
  7. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,349
    Likes Received:
    47
    Ratings:
    +130 / 4 / -0

    #91 Jersey

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I think a Catch and two feet down, everything is fair game. Exactley, "football move" is totaly subjective what realy constatutes a football move ?It probably varies from ref to ref. One of the dumbest rules in sports.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2007
  8. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,535
    Likes Received:
    292
    Ratings:
    +564 / 8 / -8

    I think the Unnatural Act call is if you get busted nut-crushing at the bottom of the pile.

    I agree, I have no idea what a Football Move is, but I do know when someone has 2 feet in bounds (depending on the freeze frame and camera angle.) That, and whether the receiver has control of the ball, gives you way too much to think about to start with.

    Why do we need the "football move" clause? Possibly because with all the OTHER rules changes (like, don't hit the QB below the waist, etc.,) the offenses were going to score way too high. So they had to counteract it with the bogus "football move" addition to a perfectly good catch/no-catch scheme of things.

    Here's an idea - make QBs football players again... take out the Kimo-therapy rule, and take out the "football move" clause.

    Either that or, screw it, illegalize the forward pass again. I never did like that fad.

    PFnV
     
  9. richpats

    richpats Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    3,499
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    On the other hand, a ref could mistakenly rule that a receiver has possession (when he is in fact bobbling the ball with both feet down) and the ball is knocked out, so without the "football move" rule, plays like that could mistakenly be ruled fumbles.
     
  10. Fixit

    Fixit In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,776
    Likes Received:
    39
    Ratings:
    +187 / 3 / -2

    It could mistakenly be ruled a fumble if he does make a football move.

    I'm in the "dumb rule" camp. Possession and two feet is good enough for me. If a guy catches a ball, good for him. If he gets blasted and coughs it up, good for the defense.
     
  11. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,349
    Likes Received:
    47
    Ratings:
    +130 / 4 / -0

    #91 Jersey

    YEAH, what he said.
     
  12. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    24,331
    Likes Received:
    196
    Ratings:
    +368 / 24 / -48

    #50 Jersey

    Or they are ruled incomplete, when, in fact, they ARE fumbles as what happened back in 2004 with Marvin Harrison. I remember watching him catch the ball, take 2 steps and then get PUMMELED and he fumbled. The Ref called it incomplete. Unfortunately, it wasn't a challengable play then. Now it is.
     
  13. brady199

    brady199 Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    1,474
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -1

    Thats why we have instant replay
     
  14. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    30,650
    Likes Received:
    478
    Ratings:
    +1,387 / 13 / -5

    Personally, I think that with or without this rule, there would be a lot of judgement calls on what is considered a catch or fumble etc. I think adding a football move actually eliminate a lot of the questionable judgement calls because with a football move they usually make it easier to know if a player actually had possession before he fumbles or is down.

    I don't think the rule is perfect, but I think it is the best option.
     
  15. rabthepat

    rabthepat 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,549
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I suppose other teams probably don't like the tuck rule. I know I do. I guess I can live with the football move rule as long as they are consistent.

    It's tough sometimes to watch a game with the new rule and to know it would have been called differently just a couple of years ago. For example, Anotonio Gates fumble of the 2 yard line in the playoff game. It was called incomplete yet before it would have been a fumble.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2007
  16. drakesta101

    drakesta101 On the Game Day Roster

    Joined:
    May 3, 2007
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I agree, the rule is beyond stupid. The rule actually has holes as well.....for sideline catches the reciever does not need to make a football move....just stretch out of bounds for a ball and have two feet in bounds and fall over...even if possession is only made for a split second....but in the middle of the field the reciever can have a ball with two feet down for as long a time and it can become jarred loose....but its an incomplete pass...advantage offense
     
  17. signbabybrady

    signbabybrady Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,985
    Likes Received:
    108
    Ratings:
    +181 / 1 / -1

    #24 Jersey

    the rule sux period :mad:
     
  18. Gumby

    Gumby 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,862
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +21 / 0 / -0

    #11 Jersey

    The rule is fine.

    It is just the referee's whimsical interpretation of it, as in the Harrison example cited above, is what is wrong. Making more referee bogus calls subject to review is a GREAT answer IMO.

    We don't need NBA-style-referees; who have one standard for the Dolts & harrisons of the world and a second higher standard for the non-star players or teams like the patriots.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>