Bluenoser
In the Rotation
- Messages
- 1,203
- Reaction score
- 0
do you guys not understand a hot route?
- Thread starter Midswat
- Start date
jnday
UDFA
- Messages
- 2,680
- Reaction score
- 0
He did a good job recognizing T. Williams bad hands. Remember when I mentioned that about a month ago?
Hoofbite
Draft Pick
- Messages
- 4,231
- Reaction score
- 0
I think the answer is in the video you posted.
Calvin never committed a "second act". Listen to the commentators talk about how a receiver lunging for the endzone would constitute a second act.
Cruz completed the catch and then made a move for the endzone. Calvin didn't technically complete the catch.
I think Calvin's call was bullshit and Cruz's call was correctly called. He caught it and broke the goal line. We don't call it a fumble when a RB lunges for the endzone and fumbles so I don't see why his lunge after the catch should be considered a part of the catch.
It's a fine line for sure but Cruz definitely caught the ball and made a move after the fact. Both should have been TDs.
Hoofbite
Draft Pick
- Messages
- 4,231
- Reaction score
- 0
Oh. My bad.
- Messages
- 10,636
- Reaction score
- 0
Murray can't last at this pace Get a RB
- Messages
- 58,656
- Reaction score
- 9,115
Pereira: Officials wrongly gave Victor Cruz a TD on incomplete pass
Posted by Michael David Smith on September 11, 2013, 10:44 AM EDT
No one knows what constitutes a catch in the NFL anymore.
When the “Calvin Johnson rule” reared its ugly head again on Sunday, and the Lions’ star receiver had a touchdown catch overturned by the referee after reviewing the replay, it looked like the NFL had properly enforced the rule, even if lots of fans think the rule is dumb.
But then on Sunday night, Giants receiver Victor Cruz had a similar play on which he grabbed the ball around the 1-yard line, lunged across the goal line, and lost control of the ball after he hit the ground in the end zone. That call was ruled a touchdown on the field, and the replay assistant who reviews all scoring plays was so confident that it was a touchdown that he didn’t even buzz down to the referee to take another look.
According to Mike Pereira, the former NFL head of officiating, the official on the field got it wrong, and the replay assistant got it wrong, too: According to Pereira, there is no difference between the Cruz play and the Johnson play, and under NFL rules both should be considered incomplete passes.
“The Cruz catch was ruled complete. It should not have. Ball came loose when he hit the ground. He did not complete the process,” Pereira wrote on Twitter.
We’re seeking clarification from the league office, and it’s possible that the NFL will say Pereira is wrong on this one and the officials in the Giants-Cowboys game were right. But what we already know is that one of the following two things has to be true:
1. Victor Cruz was awarded a touchdown he didn’t deserve.
2. The NFL’s rules on what constitutes a catch are so convoluted that even the NFL’s former head of officiating doesn’t understand them.
Either way, that’s a problem.
And it’s a problem we’ve been discussing for years. We noted in 2011 that Pereira had criticized the Calvin Johnson rule (while conveniently overlooking his own responsibility for its existence), and the rule has been criticized by fans and members of the media for years. Eventually, the NFL has to find a way to define the term “catch” that is clear enough that the officials can call it consistently. Right now, no one knows what constitutes a catch.
Posted by Michael David Smith on September 11, 2013, 10:44 AM EDT
No one knows what constitutes a catch in the NFL anymore.
When the “Calvin Johnson rule” reared its ugly head again on Sunday, and the Lions’ star receiver had a touchdown catch overturned by the referee after reviewing the replay, it looked like the NFL had properly enforced the rule, even if lots of fans think the rule is dumb.
But then on Sunday night, Giants receiver Victor Cruz had a similar play on which he grabbed the ball around the 1-yard line, lunged across the goal line, and lost control of the ball after he hit the ground in the end zone. That call was ruled a touchdown on the field, and the replay assistant who reviews all scoring plays was so confident that it was a touchdown that he didn’t even buzz down to the referee to take another look.
According to Mike Pereira, the former NFL head of officiating, the official on the field got it wrong, and the replay assistant got it wrong, too: According to Pereira, there is no difference between the Cruz play and the Johnson play, and under NFL rules both should be considered incomplete passes.
“The Cruz catch was ruled complete. It should not have. Ball came loose when he hit the ground. He did not complete the process,” Pereira wrote on Twitter.
We’re seeking clarification from the league office, and it’s possible that the NFL will say Pereira is wrong on this one and the officials in the Giants-Cowboys game were right. But what we already know is that one of the following two things has to be true:
1. Victor Cruz was awarded a touchdown he didn’t deserve.
2. The NFL’s rules on what constitutes a catch are so convoluted that even the NFL’s former head of officiating doesn’t understand them.
Either way, that’s a problem.
And it’s a problem we’ve been discussing for years. We noted in 2011 that Pereira had criticized the Calvin Johnson rule (while conveniently overlooking his own responsibility for its existence), and the rule has been criticized by fans and members of the media for years. Eventually, the NFL has to find a way to define the term “catch” that is clear enough that the officials can call it consistently. Right now, no one knows what constitutes a catch.
- Messages
- 58,656
- Reaction score
- 9,115
- Messages
- 10,636
- Reaction score
- 0
Forget pereira on twitter I asked him why romo isn't protected by the officials he told me to suck a dick
I havent' seen a replay.
Live, it looked like he caught it but lost it when feel to the ground.
But the pic someone posted of him reaching over the goal line... I guess that would be considered a "football move?"
I don't know. It's done. It didn't cost us the game, so I'm not really stressing it.
The fact that they didn't review it is the bigger problem. They're supposed to review all scoring plays.
- Messages
- 58,656
- Reaction score
- 9,115
Thats not a rulebook problem. Thats a ref problem.
I'm 100% convinced some of those guys, if not the entire crew had money on this game.
- Messages
- 5,080
- Reaction score
- 0
I was wrong. That is correct. The nfl rule book is retarded.
However, you fucktard, you didn't say shit. As a matter of fact you said a bunch of nothing. To the tune of, I don't know if the call was right or not but I at least thought it warranted a review.
Cop out. Fag boy.