Posts: 4,383
Threads: 3,489
Joined: May 2013
Reputation:
558
Adam Thielen saw a replay and accepted the outcome. Mike Zimmer saw one and still wasn’t convinced.
Late in the first half of Sunday’s 31-24 loss at Carolina, Thielen thought he had scored a touchdown for the Vikings on a 4-yard pass from Case Keenum in the deep right corner of the end zone. But the play was overturned on replay, and the Vikings settled for a field goal.
Thielen threw his helmet down in disgust after the reversal. But he said after the game he had seen a replay and agreed with the call because the ball moved when he hit the ground out of bounds and that’s the rule.
Zimmer also was visibly upset when the call was changed. On Monday, the Vikings coach expressed his displeasure with the NFL’s catch rule.
“I just think the whole thing is messed up,’’ Zimmer said. “I’ve been doing this (as a coach) for 30 years, and I know what a catch looks like. So the ball moved a little bit, yeah, but he caught the ball.’’
http://www.twincities.com/2017/12/11/vik...messed-up/
I think the messed up part is that a receiver has to maintain possession in the endzone through the play, but a RB is good as soon as they break the plane. I understand its about establishing possession but IMO a receiver has possession established as soon as he comes down with 2 feet and makes a move to secure the ball, (just like in the normal field of play)
Instead of changing the rules on the receivers, I would like to see both runners and receivers have to secure the ball through the whistle, this shit where a guy can reach it across and fumble before the whistle and have protection is BS. especially when they fumble it out of bounds.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
I think the messed up part is that a receiver has to maintain possession in the endzone through the play, but a RB is good as soon as they break the plane. I understand its about establishing possession but IMO a receiver has possession established as soon as he comes down with 2 feet and makes a move to secure the ball, (just like in the normal field of play)
Instead of changing the rules on the receivers, I would like to see both runners and receivers have to secure the ball through the whistle, this shit where a guy can reach it across and fumble before the whistle and have protection is BS. especially when they fumble it out of bounds.
It is sort of convoluted. Not sure there needs to be a change on RBs. What do you do if the RB gets the ball across but is pushed back before the whistle?
As to a catch. IMO if the WR secures it, while establishing in bounds (2 feet, or knee or whatever) that should be a catch. Once they are out of bounds, it doesn't matter.
Always thought the same about the RB/QB if you want to stick it across you should have to maintain control.
I am just happy to hear a successful NFL coach come out and say it.
The NFL is run by idiots.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
I think the messed up part is that a receiver has to maintain possession in the endzone through the play, but a RB is good as soon as they break the plane. I understand its about establishing possession but IMO a receiver has possession established as soon as he comes down with 2 feet and makes a move to secure the ball, (just like in the normal field of play)
Instead of changing the rules on the receivers, I would like to see both runners and receivers have to secure the ball through the whistle, this shit where a guy can reach it across and fumble before the whistle and have protection is BS. especially when they fumble it out of bounds.
It is sort of convoluted. Not sure there needs to be a change on RBs. What do you do if the RB gets the ball across but is pushed back before the whistle?
As to a catch. IMO if the WR secures it, while establishing in bounds (2 feet, or knee or whatever) that should be a catch. Once they are out of bounds, it doesn't matter.
Same as on any other carry... forward progress. Touchdown.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
I think the messed up part is that a receiver has to maintain possession in the endzone through the play, but a RB is good as soon as they break the plane. I understand its about establishing possession but IMO a receiver has possession established as soon as he comes down with 2 feet and makes a move to secure the ball, (just like in the normal field of play)
Instead of changing the rules on the receivers, I would like to see both runners and receivers have to secure the ball through the whistle, this shit where a guy can reach it across and fumble before the whistle and have protection is BS. especially when they fumble it out of bounds.
The rules are exactly the same in the normal field of play. Say Thielen does the exact same thing, but lands at the 20 yard line, bobbles (and to be fair, he didn't just bobble it, he lost complete control of the ball) and completes the catch at the 21 yard line. It's Vikings ball at the 21. Say Thielen is coming back to the ball, hits at the 20, bobbles and completes the catch at the 19. It's Vikings ball at the 19. Say Thielen is by the sideline, lands in play, bobbles and completes the catch out of bounds, incomplete pass.
A receiver needs to maintain possession through the catch, and if the going to the ground, through contact with the ground. It is not a live ball until this happens. A RB, on the other hand, is always holding a live ball. To put it another way, say a receiver catches the ball, gets both feet down, but immediately get creamed and loses the ball. That isn't a fumble, it's an incomplete pass.
The scenario that you describe with RBs is not the same. As soon as a player with a live ball breaks the plane of the end zone, it is a TD and the play is over and the whistle is blown. Crossing the goal line is the whistle.
The current catch rules are the best ones because there is
little room for subjectivity because they require control to happen throughout
the whole play.
If you reduce the amount of control required for it to be a
catch, you’ll just end up with the refs having more subjective control over the
outcomes of games, more plays that are controversial because people will argue
if a player had enough control of the ball for it to be a catch. As Silverjoel stated, the direct result of
reducing the amount of control needed is that in addition to the 2-3 TDs that
would be added, and the added subjectivity, you’d also get a bunch of incomplete
passes converted into fumbles. Things
like players diving to the ground for a catch, gets two knees on the ground,
maintains control of the ball until he slams into the turf. That’s now a fumble and the defender grabs
the ball and starts running the ball back.
A receiver jumps up grabs the ball at the apex, and as soon as he lands
and before he’s had a chance to react, the ball is knocked out of his hand by
the defender. That’s now a fumble. A player who catches the ball with his feet
on the ground but is immediately hit. Now
you have to decide if he had control of it.
You’re no longer looking for just whether he bobbled it at all, but
rather if he had it for long enough to gain control before he was hit or in
Thielens case before he bobbled it. Was
that slight movement by his hand evidence that he was controlling the ball?
In my mind, the rule that needs to be altered the most is
the one where an offensive player can fumble the ball forward into and out-of
the end zone and it magically becomes the defenses ball. In all other circumstances that an offensive
player fumbles the ball forward and out of bounds, they still retain control of
the ball and the ball is placed at the spot where the fumble occurred. Why not just make that true when it goes out
of the end zone. What’s the logic behind
having the rules be different and why does the defense get the ball when they
never recovered the fumble?
|
