Talk to me about the Shiancoe "TD" last night (1 Viewer)

[Alex P Keaton]

I have to confess that, while catching up via DVR with the live action last night, I really didn't give the Shiancoe play a 2nd thought. Casually watched it, saw him trap the ball, skipped the review/replay because I figured the refs would quickly make the right call.

After talking with my college roommate (and hearing him whine & moan about the horrendous call), I went back to watch it again -- but had already deleted the game on DVR.

Any non-homers out there have a perspective? I read through the game thread, and a few people complained, but one non-homer said definitively that the tip of the ball hit the ground first. What's the deal?

 

[Avery]

Not a homer and only saw the place once, but it looked to me like the tip of the ball probably hit the ground first but there didn't seem to be a good angle to definitively overturn the on the field TD call.

 

[Hang 10]

Definitely looked like a TD to me.

 

[Mario Kart]

The catch was a completed catch because Shiancoe had the ball, controlled the ball, and the ball never loosened throughout his "football" motion. The ball did hit the ground however the ball was not aided in him completing the catch due to the ground. The catch should have been a touchdown.

 

[Mello]

Looked like a TD to me. Doesn't matter if the tip of the ball hits the ground if the receiver has control and maintains it when the ball hits the ground.

 

[K8!]

I have to confess that, while catching up via DVR with the live action last night, I really didn't give the Shiancoe play a 2nd thought. Casually watched it, saw him trap the ball, skipped the review/replay because I figured the refs would quickly make the right call.After talking with my college roommate (and hearing him whine & moan about the horrendous call), I went back to watch it again -- but had already deleted the game on DVR.Any non-homers out there have a perspective? I read through the game thread, and a few people complained, but one non-homer said definitively that the tip of the ball hit the ground first. What's the deal?

I'm a Packer homer. Not exactly who you care to have responding. That said, I thought it was a catch. Yes the tip of the ball touched the ground, but I thought he had possession of the ball by then and that the ground did not aid him in controlling the ball. I did not see the ball move from his grasp as he and the ball touched in. The ball moved back down his torso upon contact, but to me it appeared his hands did as well. I saw no shifting of the ball in his grasp. I definately did not see enough to overturn the call on the field. I wanted to, but i did not. I was surprised at the call.

 

[sho nuff]

I have to confess that, while catching up via DVR with the live action last night, I really didn't give the Shiancoe play a 2nd thought. Casually watched it, saw him trap the ball, skipped the review/replay because I figured the refs would quickly make the right call.After talking with my college roommate (and hearing him whine & moan about the horrendous call), I went back to watch it again -- but had already deleted the game on DVR.Any non-homers out there have a perspective? I read through the game thread, and a few people complained, but one non-homer said definitively that the tip of the ball hit the ground first. What's the deal?

I'm a Packer homer. Not exactly who you care to have responding. That said, I thought it was a catch. Yes the tip of the ball touched the ground, but I thought he had possession of the ball by then and that the ground did not aid him in controlling the ball. I did not see the ball move from his grasp as he and the ball touched in. The ball moved back down his torso upon contact, but to me it appeared his hands did as well. I saw no shifting of the ball in his grasp. I definately did not see enough to overturn the call on the field. I wanted to, but i did not. I was surprised at the call.

Agreed...but I think its one of those where the ref sees the ball move at all, he calls it incomplete.Youd probably get a different ref to agree it was a catch.8 times out of 10 that stands as a TD though.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Interesting. Anybody have a video link?

 

[gianmarco]

I have to confess that, while catching up via DVR with the live action last night, I really didn't give the Shiancoe play a 2nd thought. Casually watched it, saw him trap the ball, skipped the review/replay because I figured the refs would quickly make the right call.After talking with my college roommate (and hearing him whine & moan about the horrendous call), I went back to watch it again -- but had already deleted the game on DVR.Any non-homers out there have a perspective? I read through the game thread, and a few people complained, but one non-homer said definitively that the tip of the ball hit the ground first. What's the deal?

I'm a Packer homer. Not exactly who you care to have responding. That said, I thought it was a catch. Yes the tip of the ball touched the ground, but I thought he had possession of the ball by then and that the ground did not aid him in controlling the ball. I did not see the ball move from his grasp as he and the ball touched in. The ball moved back down his torso upon contact, but to me it appeared his hands did as well. I saw no shifting of the ball in his grasp. I definately did not see enough to overturn the call on the field. I wanted to, but i did not. I was surprised at the call.

Couldn't be a clearer TD. In fact, if you want to show refs a video about a rule where a player has control, the ball touches the ground, but the player still maintains COMPLETE control in order to rule it a catch, this video would be exhibit A. No idea how the refs came to that decision. IMO, if it had been ruled incomplete to start, there was enough evidence to overturn it to a TD.

 

[packersfan]

Definitely looked like a TD to me.

I'm happy as a Packers fan obviously but that sure looked like a TD to me. I don't know how you can overturn that. He caught the ball and hit the ground and never lost control. That play was arguably the biggest of the game too. The Vikings only have to kick a FG on their last drive if that call wasn't reversed.

 

[sho nuff]

Interesting. Anybody have a video link?

Not to the individual play, but I saw it this morning on NFL.com's gameday highlights.It was too hard to see much of the game as they were in a split screen here with bad weather south of us.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Clear TD. Refs blew that one.

It's the Bert Emanuel thing. He controlled the ball even though it touched the ground.

J

 

[Black]

I have to confess that, while catching up via DVR That said, I thought it was a catch. Yes the tip of the ball touched the ground, but I thought he had possession of the ball by then and that the ground did not aid him in controlling the ball. I did not see the ball move from his grasp as he and the ball touched in. The ball moved back down his torso upon contact, but to me it appeared his hands did as well. I saw no shifting of the ball in his grasp. I definately did not see enough to overturn the call on the field. I wanted to, but i did not. I was surprised at the call.

Agree with all of this. That ball was caught, the nose hit the ground but never moved in his hands. 'The ground aided in catching the ball'...I don't really agree; it's not like trapping the ball when it comes in low and having the ground direct it between your arms. That being said, it's always a catch if you have your hands/body under the ball, and that didn't happen.

 

[Babu Bhatt2]

That catch was virtually identical to the Jacquez Green "no catch" in the NFC Championship game from the 1999-2000 season. After that play was ruled incomplete, the NFL changed the rule ostensibly to make such plays catches.

The refs got it wrong.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Interesting. So basically everybody in America thought it was a catch except the refs. Just another example of why the NFL needs to make some serious changes.....so that the refs can be consistently on board with what is a catch and what isn't.

 

[jason12vb]

Not surprised to see a universal agreement here, definitely a catch. (Viking's fan)

Shiancoe was interviewed on KFAN after the game and said he was told that even though they thought he had possession, the ref's didn't consider catching the ball with your arms total control. Had the same play happened with the ball in his hands and not his forearms it would have been ruled a catch. Never heard that before.

What a poorly officiated game last nigh (both ways). I watched the game with a couple packer fans and there were at least 6 times when one of us said something to the effect of, "Bad call, but I'll take it".

That being said...the Vikings still had a chance to win and shot themselves in the foot. I haven't listened to the podcast of fanline yet, but if people aren't questioning Chili taking a knee with 25 seconds left and two timeouts in the first half then I'll be very surprised. Had we gotten a FG there we only need a FG at the end to win.

 

[packersfan]

I haven't listened to the podcast of fanline yet, but if people aren't questioning Chili taking a knee with 25 seconds left and two timeouts in the first half then I'll be very surprised. Had we gotten a FG there we only need a FG at the end to win.

I had the same reaction Moss did. I was stunned. It was even worse when you consider the Packers were getting the ball to start the second half. The Vikings made a great play to prevent the Packers from scoring and had a golden opportunity to add points before the half. Childress really is an awful head coach.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

It seems a very similar situation to the CJ touchdown week one against the Bears - most every fan is going to call that a touchdown because it is completely consistent with our understanding of what the rules are. However, I think the official may be correct under a strict reading of the rule as I understand it, as they apparently were with CJ's catch.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I haven't listened to the podcast of fanline yet, but if people aren't questioning Chili taking a knee with 25 seconds left and two timeouts in the first half then I'll be very surprised. Had we gotten a FG there we only need a FG at the end to win.

I had the same reaction Moss did. I was stunned. It was even worse when you consider the Packers were getting the ball to start the second half. The Vikings made a great play to prevent the Packers from scoring and had a golden opportunity to add points before the half. Childress really is an awful head coach.

To take this tangent further, wasn't McCarthy's decision to TAKE a timeout after the 1st down play even more bizarre? It reminded me of week 3 against the Bears, watching Lovie Smith try to score quickly on the last drive while McCarthy desperately tried NOT to let him score. Does any division have worse head coaches than the NFC North???

 

[Alex P Keaton]

It seems a very similar situation to the CJ touchdown week one against the Bears - most every fan is going to call that a touchdown because it is completely consistent with our understanding of what the rules are. However, I think the official may be correct under a strict reading of the rule as I understand it, as they apparently were with CJ's catch.

Well, this is exactly what I'm trying to understand. Everyone in this thread so far has stated emphatically that it was a TD. So if this is a "strict reading of the rule", can someone simply point to the rule?

 

[Phurfur]

The catch was a completed catch because Shiancoe had the ball, controlled the ball, and the ball never loosened throughout his "football" motion. The ball did hit the ground however the ball was not aided in him completing the catch due to the ground. The catch should have been a touchdown.

What was that football "motion"?

 

[Mario Kart]

The catch was a completed catch because Shiancoe had the ball, controlled the ball, and the ball never loosened throughout his "football" motion. The ball did hit the ground however the ball was not aided in him completing the catch due to the ground. The catch should have been a touchdown.

What was that football "motion"?

The dive, the grabbing, the bringing in to the chest, the keeping control of the ball throughout the landing, the keeping control after the landing. At no time did the ball juggle, lose possession of, fall, drop, or anything. Clear?

 

[CletiusMaximus]

It seems a very similar situation to the CJ touchdown week one against the Bears - most every fan is going to call that a touchdown because it is completely consistent with our understanding of what the rules are. However, I think the official may be correct under a strict reading of the rule as I understand it, as they apparently were with CJ's catch.

Well, this is exactly what I'm trying to understand. Everyone in this thread so far has stated emphatically that it was a TD. So if this is a "strict reading of the rule", can someone simply point to the rule?

I would like to see the rule as well. Apparently the crucial issue is whether or not the ground aided the receiver in making the catch.If this discussion goes anything like the CJ discussions, we can expect a ton of argument based on everything but the relevant language that was applied on the play.

 

[Papa Schnay]

Watching the game last night with Viking fans and I'll agree with the poster above that the game was officiated badly for both ends.

That said, the way I saw the play and interpreted it was that as the ball was getting caught the tip of that ball hit the ground and his arms were on both sides of the ball. As soon as the tip of that ball hit the ground since his forearms weren't under the ball it's a non-catch but then again I've seen goofier things happen this year.

The real issue here is that Favre's throw was so far off the mark that it should have never gotten to that point! Good play on Shank's part, bad throw on Favre's part. The Vikes have some serious issues this year....the nonexistent pass rush being one of them

 

[BigJim®]

NFL officiating is ruining the game. First it's a 'process' to complete that reverses TDs like Calvin Johnson's. Now it is what part of the hands are on the ball even though it is maintained throughout? NFL, you're ruining your game by overcomplicating. If 99 folks out of 100 think it's a catch, it's a catch. Simple as that. The ball did not move and he retained control, which is the rule. More importantly, I thought there was supposed to be 'irrefutable evidence' to overturn a call on the field? How could that standard have possibly been met when 99 of 100 still think it was a TD after viewing replay? Don't allow officials to overcomplicate to the point of deciding games. Really a shame the point officiating has gotten to on what is and is not a catch.

 

[AF Retired]

As far as the rule goes - my rule book is printed in 2007 but this is what it says:

Quote:

Section I, Forward Pass, Backward Pass, Fumble

Article 5 Any forward pass (legal or illegal) becomes incomplete and the ball is dead immediately if the pass strikes the ground or goes out of bounds.

Note: If there is any question by the covering official(s) if a pass is complete, intercepted, or incomplete, it is to be rulled incomplete

Unquote

So if the ball touched the gound (no body part under it) it would be incomplete.

 

[massive attack]

I haven't listened to the podcast of fanline yet, but if people aren't questioning Chili taking a knee with 25 seconds left and two timeouts in the first half then I'll be very surprised. Had we gotten a FG there we only need a FG at the end to win.

I had the same reaction Moss did. I was stunned. It was even worse when you consider the Packers were getting the ball to start the second half. The Vikings made a great play to prevent the Packers from scoring and had a golden opportunity to add points before the half. Childress really is an awful head coach.

To take this tangent further, wasn't McCarthy's decision to TAKE a timeout after the 1st down play even more bizarre? It reminded me of week 3 against the Bears, watching Lovie Smith try to score quickly on the last drive while McCarthy desperately tried NOT to let him score. Does any division have worse head coaches than the NFC North???

The Packers were going to try and stop the Vikings 3 and out and try to take momentum going into the half and also getting the kickoff in the 2nd half. It didn't work out when AD made the run. After the Moss penalty there was like 40 seconds give or take and the Vikings had 2 time outs left with the ball on their own 24 in a 1st and 20 situation. They took their best shot with Randy and it didn't work out. Be happy with the lead and don't put Favre in a situation where he is pressing to get into FG position. Childress has made plenty of boneheaded moves, but I have no problem the way that series was handled by him.

 

[killrobotkill]

It seems a very similar situation to the CJ touchdown week one against the Bears - most every fan is going to call that a touchdown because it is completely consistent with our understanding of what the rules are. However, I think the official may be correct under a strict reading of the rule as I understand it, as they apparently were with CJ's catch.

Well, this is exactly what I'm trying to understand. Everyone in this thread so far has stated emphatically that it was a TD. So if this is a "strict reading of the rule", can someone simply point to the rule?

I would like to see the rule as well. Apparently the crucial issue is whether or not the ground aided the receiver in making the catch.If this discussion goes anything like the CJ discussions, we can expect a ton of argument based on everything but the relevant language that was applied on the play.

FWIW, here is a link to the 2010 NFL rulebook. No time to look up the pertinent rule myself, but hopefully this helps.

 

[JbizzleMan]

IMHO. The video was NOT clear enough to overturn the call on the field. Vikings had quite a few questionable calls go against them.

 

[AF Retired]

I checked the rule book quoted above for 2010 (my rule book printed in 2007 does not include this)

Article 3 Completed Pass.

Item 4: Ball touches ground. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control of it, it is a catch provided that the player continues to maintain control.

 

[jason12vb]

I haven't listened to the podcast of fanline yet, but if people aren't questioning Chili taking a knee with 25 seconds left and two timeouts in the first half then I'll be very surprised. Had we gotten a FG there we only need a FG at the end to win.

I had the same reaction Moss did. I was stunned. It was even worse when you consider the Packers were getting the ball to start the second half. The Vikings made a great play to prevent the Packers from scoring and had a golden opportunity to add points before the half. Childress really is an awful head coach.

To take this tangent further, wasn't McCarthy's decision to TAKE a timeout after the 1st down play even more bizarre? It reminded me of week 3 against the Bears, watching Lovie Smith try to score quickly on the last drive while McCarthy desperately tried NOT to let him score. Does any division have worse head coaches than the NFC North???

The Packers were going to try and stop the Vikings 3 and out and try to take momentum going into the half and also getting the kickoff in the 2nd half. It didn't work out when AD made the run. After the Moss penalty there was like 40 seconds give or take and the Vikings had 2 time outs left with the ball on their own 24 in a 1st and 20 situation. They took their best shot with Randy and it didn't work out. Be happy with the lead and don't put Favre in a situation where he is pressing to get into FG position. Childress has made plenty of boneheaded moves, but I have no problem the way that series was handled by him.

You're right, that's what happened, but why stop there...why not include the 14 yard AP gain after to get them almost to their 40 with 25 seconds left? They had 2nd and 6 from the 38(?) with 2 timeouts left and arguably one of the best kickers in the game in a stadium he used to call his home field. Childress' quote after the game is that he was scared of having to punt and getting it blocked. Really, a punt block is what you were scared of?edit to add apology for hijack.

 

[Bruce Leroy]

Half the football touched the groundwhen he landed, Shiancoe was holding onto the back half of the ball. The ball moved when it hit the ground. He wasn't controlling it until after he landed with the ground helping him make the catch.

Not a catch. I'll bet Mike Perreira agrees.

 

[TheCommish]

I definitely think that TD should have stood up after review. Ridiculous to overturn that one.

No one seems to be talking about the Quarless TD by Green Bay, though (I think that was the one, anyway). He got one foot down, then it looked to me like his entire backside landed on the back of the goal line. Half in bounds, half out of bounds. And he didn't even keep control when he hit the ground, which was all anyone could talk about after the Calvin Johnson fiasco. I was thinking that Childress would SURELY throw his red hankie on that one, but nope. I was shocked.

 

[conboy]

What's missing from this discussion is that Shiancoe was wide open over the middle, and Favre threw a ball that he had to dive for instead of hitting him in stride. Had the throw been better, there would be no discussion about the catch.

 

[sho nuff]

I definitely think that TD should have stood up after review. Ridiculous to overturn that one.No one seems to be talking about the Quarless TD by Green Bay, though (I think that was the one, anyway). He got one foot down, then it looked to me like his entire backside landed on the back of the goal line. Half in bounds, half out of bounds. And he didn't even keep control when he hit the ground, which was all anyone could talk about after the Calvin Johnson fiasco. I was thinking that Childress would SURELY throw his red hankie on that one, but nope. I was shocked.

I think had he not bobbled it, it was going to be a TD. His butt hits first in bounds.But then he bobbles it.Should have been challenged and should have been overturned. I never saw the bobble on the first replay, but have seen it now.Ref was shielded from the bobble so hard to blame that ref in the back of the endzone.

 

[Novice2]

It seems a very similar situation to the CJ touchdown week one against the Bears - most every fan is going to call that a touchdown because it is completely consistent with our understanding of what the rules are. However, I think the official may be correct under a strict reading of the rule as I understand it, as they apparently were with CJ's catch.

Id like a link to that rule.Does it go something like if the ball hits the ground but doesn't move it is a catch unless the ball is not in both recivers hands against the packers on sunday night football

 

[Tau837]

It's things like the Quarles TD that makes me wonder why the NFL doesn't go to a college style system of replay review. In college every play is reviewed in the booth and the review ref signals down to the field if he wants to stop play while he looks at the previous play more closely. If the NFL had something like that, the Quarles TD would have been overturned.

That said, I know that isn't the subject of this thread, so sorry for the off topic post.

 

[jason12vb]

I definitely think that TD should have stood up after review. Ridiculous to overturn that one.No one seems to be talking about the Quarless TD by Green Bay, though (I think that was the one, anyway). He got one foot down, then it looked to me like his entire backside landed on the back of the goal line. Half in bounds, half out of bounds. And he didn't even keep control when he hit the ground, which was all anyone could talk about after the Calvin Johnson fiasco. I was thinking that Childress would SURELY throw his red hankie on that one, but nope. I was shocked.

I think had he not bobbled it, it was going to be a TD. His butt hits first in bounds.But then he bobbles it.Should have been challenged and should have been overturned. I never saw the bobble on the first replay, but have seen it now.Ref was shielded from the bobble so hard to blame that ref in the back of the endzone.

Not sure you'll find many people that think that was a TD if reviewed. Packers just did a great job of getting the XP in before the Vikings could see a replay to get them to challenge. Personally I thought the way he landed backside first at the back of the endzone that it warranted a shot at the challenge regardless of whether or not they had reason to believe they would win. (They obviously didn't care about their timeouts to finish the half)

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I definitely think that TD should have stood up after review. Ridiculous to overturn that one.No one seems to be talking about the Quarless TD by Green Bay, though (I think that was the one, anyway). He got one foot down, then it looked to me like his entire backside landed on the back of the goal line. Half in bounds, half out of bounds. And he didn't even keep control when he hit the ground, which was all anyone could talk about after the Calvin Johnson fiasco. I was thinking that Childress would SURELY throw his red hankie on that one, but nope. I was shocked.

I think had he not bobbled it, it was going to be a TD. His butt hits first in bounds.But then he bobbles it.Should have been challenged and should have been overturned. I never saw the bobble on the first replay, but have seen it now.Ref was shielded from the bobble so hard to blame that ref in the back of the endzone.

Sounds like, if nothing else, everyone agrees that McCarthy did a great job of picking his challenges (first time ever, hurray!) while Childress did a terrible job. Again, two horrible coaches facing off.Still wish there was a link to the Shiancoe play.

 

[jason12vb]

Still wish there was a link to the Shiancoe play.

1:45 and replay at 2:00http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlig...kers-highlights

 

[az_prof]

The catch was a completed catch because Shiancoe had the ball, controlled the ball, and the ball never loosened throughout his "football" motion. The ball did hit the ground however the ball was not aided in him completing the catch due to the ground. The catch should have been a touchdown.

What really concerns me about this is that the correct call on the field was overturned. It can happen that the wrong call is made on the field. It can even happen that the wrong call on the field is then upheld upon review because there is supposed to be "overwhelming evidence" to overturn. So, to see the right call overturned on review really makes me question the integrity of the refereeing in the NFL. This isn't the first call that has made question it and it isn't only "my team." The NFL needs to quit worrying about who the players are sleeping with or whether they are drinking or not, and focus on the most important threat to the game--the quality and integrity of the referees. There is so much money bet on the NFL and referees are not full-time professionals and they aren't paid like anyone else in the business that isn't hard to imagine they are bribed. There needs to be an investigation of the whole league--again, this isn't just this call or this game. It's symptomatic of what goes on across the league every week. Again, horrible to reverse the correct call. Simply horrible.

 

[((Morpheus))]

Terrible call.

 

[Flash]

The catch was a completed catch because Shiancoe had the ball, controlled the ball, and the ball never loosened throughout his "football" motion. The ball did hit the ground however the ball was not aided in him completing the catch due to the ground. The catch should have been a touchdown.

But didn't the ball change positions, in other words, "moved" when the nose hit the ground?

 

[Flash]

I haven't listened to the podcast of fanline yet, but if people aren't questioning Chili taking a knee with 25 seconds left and two timeouts in the first half then I'll be very surprised. Had we gotten a FG there we only need a FG at the end to win.

I had the same reaction Moss did. I was stunned. It was even worse when you consider the Packers were getting the ball to start the second half. The Vikings made a great play to prevent the Packers from scoring and had a golden opportunity to add points before the half. Childress really is an awful head coach.

To take this tangent further, wasn't McCarthy's decision to TAKE a timeout after the 1st down play even more bizarre? It reminded me of week 3 against the Bears, watching Lovie Smith try to score quickly on the last drive while McCarthy desperately tried NOT to let him score. Does any division have worse head coaches than the NFC North???

You'd be hard pressed to find one.

 

[Tau837]

I haven't listened to the podcast of fanline yet, but if people aren't questioning Chili taking a knee with 25 seconds left and two timeouts in the first half then I'll be very surprised. Had we gotten a FG there we only need a FG at the end to win.

I had the same reaction Moss did. I was stunned. It was even worse when you consider the Packers were getting the ball to start the second half. The Vikings made a great play to prevent the Packers from scoring and had a golden opportunity to add points before the half. Childress really is an awful head coach.

To take this tangent further, wasn't McCarthy's decision to TAKE a timeout after the 1st down play even more bizarre? It reminded me of week 3 against the Bears, watching Lovie Smith try to score quickly on the last drive while McCarthy desperately tried NOT to let him score. Does any division have worse head coaches than the NFC North???

You'd be hard pressed to find one.

AFC West?

 

[sho nuff]

I haven't listened to the podcast of fanline yet, but if people aren't questioning Chili taking a knee with 25 seconds left and two timeouts in the first half then I'll be very surprised. Had we gotten a FG there we only need a FG at the end to win.

I had the same reaction Moss did. I was stunned. It was even worse when you consider the Packers were getting the ball to start the second half. The Vikings made a great play to prevent the Packers from scoring and had a golden opportunity to add points before the half. Childress really is an awful head coach.

To take this tangent further, wasn't McCarthy's decision to TAKE a timeout after the 1st down play even more bizarre? It reminded me of week 3 against the Bears, watching Lovie Smith try to score quickly on the last drive while McCarthy desperately tried NOT to let him score. Does any division have worse head coaches than the NFC North???

You'd be hard pressed to find one.

AFC West?

Oh, I think we need a poll.But the West might win.

 

[Flash]

I definitely think that TD should have stood up after review. Ridiculous to overturn that one.No one seems to be talking about the Quarless TD by Green Bay, though (I think that was the one, anyway). He got one foot down, then it looked to me like his entire backside landed on the back of the goal line. Half in bounds, half out of bounds. And he didn't even keep control when he hit the ground, which was all anyone could talk about after the Calvin Johnson fiasco. I was thinking that Childress would SURELY throw his red hankie on that one, but nope. I was shocked.

I think had he not bobbled it, it was going to be a TD. His butt hits first in bounds.But then he bobbles it.Should have been challenged and should have been overturned. I never saw the bobble on the first replay, but have seen it now.Ref was shielded from the bobble so hard to blame that ref in the back of the endzone.

Agreed. He was definitely in bounds when he landed, and he definitely bobbled it and didn't get control until he rolled out of bounds.How Chilly didn't throw the flag is beyond me, however none of the defenders went berserk calling for the flag either, so the defenders missed it as well. I think if they go nuts enough, the flag might come out.

 

[Dought Man]

Why doesnt the NFL just come out and say what they really want to say.. "If the ball ever touches the ground for any reason during the "process", its not a catch". Thats where they are heading.

 

[Flash]

It's things like the Quarles TD that makes me wonder why the NFL doesn't go to a college style system of replay review. In college every play is reviewed in the booth and the review ref signals down to the field if he wants to stop play while he looks at the previous play more closely. If the NFL had something like that, the Quarles TD would have been overturned.That said, I know that isn't the subject of this thread, so sorry for the off topic post.

Not just the Quarless play but Johnsons' no-catch, and a zillion other plays this year.

 

[Mario Kart]

The catch was a completed catch because Shiancoe had the ball, controlled the ball, and the ball never loosened throughout his "football" motion. The ball did hit the ground however the ball was not aided in him completing the catch due to the ground. The catch should have been a touchdown.

But didn't the ball change positions, in other words, "moved" when the nose hit the ground?

No, the ball did not move. Think of the ground as another player. If the ball hits another player on the back while in possession of the receiver, the catch is still a catch even though it could be argued that the other player aided in the WR catching the ball. In theory the ground helped him catch the ball but what the ground did not do is knock the ball loose and then the receiver "re caught" it. The ball never lost possession even if/when aided by an outside force. The ball was in the grasp of the receiver neither enabling or aided, essentially, in allowing the receiver to make the catch.