Page 1 of 1

Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2015 11:11 am
by Jordysghost
I cant believe nobody is talking about this.

Dude caught the ball, got one foot down, bobbled it, got another foot down, and then went out of bounds bobbling the football (Which is irrelevant at that point, being that the first bobble came after one foot down and before the other foot was down.)

When you compound that with the Aaron Rodgers pick that hit the ground and moved, wtf is the point of have replay review if you aren't going to get the call right? A judgement call is a sketchy propisition and I get that, but both of those calls were clearly by rule incomplete and they both went to REVIEW and still, were called incorrectly.

Re: Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:56 pm
by Mothman
Jordysghost wrote:I cant believe nobody is talking about this.

Dude caught the ball, got one foot down, bobbled it, got another foot down, and then went out of bounds bobbling the football (Which is irrelevant at that point, being that the first bobble came after one foot down and before the other foot was down.
His feet didn't matter because his body hit the ground before he went out of bounds. The ball was dead at that point. He caught the ball in his hands and finished the process, so it was a catch.

Re: Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2015 5:27 pm
by fiestavike
:lol:

can we just go to a clear and sensible rule on this issue?

Re: Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2015 5:52 pm
by Mothman
fiestavike wrote::lol:

can we just go to a clear and sensible rule on this issue?
No way! :)

Re: Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2015 7:30 am
by Thaumaturgist
Unless I've watched a different one, it sure looked like a catch to me.

Re: Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:09 pm
by PurpleKoolaid
It was a catch. One of the best ive seen. He has continuing progress throughout the catch. Its surprising the Refs gave it to him, since it wasnt a throw from Rogers, Brady, etc.

Re: Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:09 pm
by Jordysghost
Mothman wrote: His feet didn't matter because his body hit the ground before he went out of bounds. The ball was dead at that point. He caught the ball in his hands and finished the process, so it was a catch.
If the ball was dead when his body hit, then the fact that he bobbled it shortly after his body hit means he didn't finish the process. He, by rule, never completed the process before he went out of bounds. I think this further illustrates how subjectively these calls are made.

Re: Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:11 pm
by Jordysghost
PurpleKoolaid wrote:It was a catch. One of the best ive seen. He has continuing progress throughout the catch. Its surprising the Refs gave it to him, since it wasnt a throw from Rogers, Brady, etc.
It is surprising that they gave it to him, being that he didn't complete the process before hitting out of bounds.

Oh and yea, I agree, you can tell the refs love the Packers what with the fail mary and all..

Re: Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:51 pm
by PurpleKoolaid
Jordysghost wrote: It is surprising that they gave it to him, being that he didn't complete the process before hitting out of bounds.

Oh and yea, I agree, you can tell the refs love the Packers what with the fail mary and all..
LOL, 1 play and the Packer nation thinks they are being picked on. Looks at what your DB's get away with, and then watch the Vikings Rhodes, just as an example.

Re: Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:59 pm
by Jordysghost
PurpleKoolaid wrote: LOL, 1 play and the Packer nation thinks they are being picked on. Looks at what your DB's get away with, and then watch the Vikings Rhodes, just as an example.
Lmao I could just as easily make the same claim, and it would be no less valid. Oh derp your Vikings get away with with everything and we get called for everything!! :lol: You are just going to look for whatever you want to believe, and believe it. Honestly? Pretty sad.

BTW, the Fail Mary was a drive worth of awful inexplicable calls, not one play, but if you want to go there, how about we talk about the tampering the NFL let you off the hook for in 2008. There are a million bad calls that have went in the favor of opposing teams playing the Packers, but if I was to bring up any examples you would just shut your ears and say lalalalala.

Litterally every big dog in their respective division gets accused of 'getting all of the calls' in every single division in the league, I wonder why.

Re: Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 9:09 pm
by PurpleKoolaid
Yeah, I know every team thinks their team is the most penalized. But the Fail Mary was good for morale for the rest of the NFL :lol:

Re: Giants game winning catch was not a catch.

Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 9:11 pm
by Jordysghost
PurpleKoolaid wrote:Yeah, I know every team thinks their team is the most penalized. But the Fail Mary was good for morale for the rest of the NFL :lol:
Idk about that, but at least it got those friken crappy Highschool refs out of there.