Question on Tates TD

[PatsFaninAZ]

That's a great point. Hand and foot equals two feet. TD

Nope.

Must be two feet or any part of the body other than the hands.

That's the rule. Helmet and no feet and no hands? Touchdown. One elbow only? Touchdown. Knee? Touchdown. One foot and two hands? Out of bounds.

 

[ALP]

Take it up with BB. Tate only played on 21 of 61 snaps. If he was the cat's meow, he'd be up there with Welker/Branch (45 and 43 snaps, respectively).

haha, if Tate was on the same level of branch and welker, we wouldn't need another wr period

to expect a guy playing his first season as an nfl WR to really produce that much is asking a heck of a lot

we wont really know till his 3rd year playing, maybe 2nd since he was here but didnt play his rookie year

 

[Deus Irae]

haha, if Tate was on the same level of branch and welker, we wouldn't need another wr period

to expect a guy playing his first season as an nfl WR to really produce that much is asking a heck of a lot

we wont really know till his 3rd year playing, maybe 2nd since he was here but didnt play his rookie year

That's fine but, if you're going to give a player until year 3 before giving a full evaluation, why jump* on people who note he's got problems (of any kind, since I'm just talking in generalities) in year 1 rather than just saying something like "give him time"?

*I realize it was not you who'd made the "catch" comment, but you were the one responding, so I'm posing the question to you as a generality.

 

[SpiderFox53]

I don't think so. I think we're debating the meaning in the NFL rulebook of a catch (or "complete" forward pass), which is:

Article 3. Completed or Intercepted Pass. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:

(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands.
. . .

If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body other than his hands to the ground, or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch.

Thanks for that. It was still a good TD tho, either forearm or knee count (as DB said the knee and elbow were almost simultaneous).

 

[andrewgarrr]

Nope.

Must be two feet or any part of the body other than the hands.

That's the rule. Helmet and no feet and no hands? Touchdown. One elbow only? Touchdown. Knee? Touchdown. One foot and two hands? Out of bounds.

One foot and two hands. That is one hell of a touchdown. There should be a separate rule in the rulebook that allows this to be a touchdown. That is awesome.

 

[Patpartizan]

I think why the catch was so sweet for me was that for a moment Brady was considering running it in. Brady meeting his own Mo Lewis at the goal line could have changed everything.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

One foot and two hands. That is one hell of a touchdown. There should be a separate rule in the rulebook that allows this to be a touchdown. That is awesome.

Yeah, could you imagine not getting credit for that?

I'd like to see a guy score with his facemask and nothing else, like a diving headflip or something where the helmet touches and then he flips out of bounds.

 

[italia44]

Nope.

Must be two feet or any part of the body other than the hands.

That's the rule. Helmet and no feet and no hands? Touchdown. One elbow only? Touchdown. Knee? Touchdown. One foot and two hands? Out of bounds.

Nope ...your wrong.....In the field of play,the hand doesn't count because the ball carrier can ADVANCE the ball with only his hand on the ground.

In the end zone,this does not matter....the "hand" becomes the 2nd body part.Once Tate had one foot down,ANY body part is sufficient to constitute a catch.Foot down....Hand down....doesn't have to be the elbow,he's in bounds BEFORE any body part is out of bounds.Think of it this way....In the back of the EZ,the receiver could have a toe down and a finger down and the rest of his body over the back line....as long as he maintains control,it's a touchdown.....Two body parts.:rocker:

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Nope ...your wrong.....In the field of play,the hand doesn't count because the ball carrier can ADVANCE the ball with only his hand on the ground.

In the end zone,this does not matter....the "hand" becomes the 2nd body part.Once Tate had one foot down,ANY body part is sufficient to constitute a catch.Foot down....Hand down....doesn't have to be the elbow,he's in bounds BEFORE any body part is out of bounds.Think of it this way....In the back of the EZ,the receiver could have a toe down and a finger down and the rest of his body over the back line....as long as he maintains control,it's a touchdown.....Two body parts.:rocker:

I quoted the rule above. Right out of the NFL rulebook. It's the rule about when a catch is complete. There's nothing about number of body parts. The rule defines what a complete catch is. It's not a complete catch until two feet or one part of the body, other than the hand, touches in bounds. It's a pretty clear rule.

You also may be right that body parts also dictate when and whether a player is down. I didn't look at the rule. I don't know what it says. I'll trust you. But I'm quoting rule 8, about what constitutes a completed catch, as opposed to an incomplete catch. It's not a complete catch until the second foot touches in bounds, or the body part that is not a hand touches in bounds. If something touches out of bounds before that happens, it's incomplete.