Refs love them some green bay

[onebud34]

Than ask him the next time ya see him

Probably won't...it's more fun to get you to bite at me ankles

 

[Nail Polish]

Umm...the ball was dislodged when he hit the ground. And the football was moving as he was going to the ground.

That is why it was overturned.

Bad rule...but still the correct one

if the ball was moving when he was diving after his 3 steps of running and it became dislodged, then thats a fumble.

 

[onebud34]

if the ball was moving when he was diving after his 3 steps of running and it became dislodged, then thats a fumble.

It isn't actually.

It's an incompete pass

 

[Nail Polish]

It isn't actually.

It's an incompete pass

Only if he was in the act of catching the ball..he had clearly already caught the ball...The ball was dislodged after his football move of running 3 steps

 

[onebud34]

Yep...and he failed to maintain possession when going to the ground.

This has been explained ad-nausem. But here is the rule again...and why it was ruled incomplete

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

 

[Nail Polish]

Yep...and he failed to maintain possession when going to the ground.

This has been explained ad-nausem. But here is the rule again...and why it was ruled incomplete

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

Only if he went to the ground as part of the catch..He went to the ground as a result of his dive for the GL...That catch had already been made, and the football move of running 3 steps separates the catch from the dive/fumble

Using your logic, if someone catches a ball, runs 40 yards and fumbles it, its an INC pass

 

[onebud34]

Please re-read

 

[Nail Polish]

I did, and that rule doesnt apply to someone that has already made a catch and is running for the GL and fumbles

 

[onebud34]

Correct...

He didn't make the catch before diving.

 

[Nail Polish]

Correct...

He didn't make the catch before diving.

He most assuredly did as the video I posted shows..Then he ran 3 steps towards the GL, and dove for it committing a fumble

 

[Nail Polish]

COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS
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; and
(c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act
common to the game

running 3 steps towards the goal line and then diving for said goal line are acts common to the game

 

[onebud34]

He most assuredly did as the video I posted shows..Then he ran 3 steps towards the GL, and dove for it committing a fumble

The ball is moving as he's taking those 3 steps (which it can't to maintain possession), er running as you call it

 

[onebud34]

Running 3 steps...running 3 steps...

 

[malcore]

I have to disagree with bud on this one, partly on how we both view the play, but mostly on semantics. Thus the only conclusion is it is a bad rule.

 

[Nail Polish]

The ball is moving as he's taking those 3 steps (which it can't to maintain possession), er running as you call it

doesnt matter as long as he made the catch first...any ball movement after that is part of the fumble

 

[onebud34]

But he never made the catch


Sent from my toilet using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Nail Polish]

yes he did

 

[onebud34]

Then you are confused about the ruling


Sent from my toilet using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Monk]

Cowboys were robbed. Plain and simple. But this time, no one will get an apology for terrible officiating


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The Hawk]

What is interesting is that Dallas nor GB should be playing for the conference championship. Both of them were aided by terrible calls by the officiating crews. Now I hate Detroit as much as anyone but they deserved a shot at Green Bay not dalls.