Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
That Santana Moss play everyone's confused about (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Lobary
- Start date
dgreen
Footballguy
Yes, but he didn't have possession at that point.
Saint
Footballguy
Actually fairly simple.. He didn't have possession of the ball when he was forced to the ground. He caught the ball after being on the ground and was not touched by a defensive person. He should have been able to get up and run.
Mookie Blaylock
Footballguy
Not gonna happen on opening night in New York when the champs haven't won (at home) in a year. Just sayin'.
blackjack23
Footballguy
Once they whistled him down they couldnt overturn it anyway.
Al Toon's Mole
Footballguy
I'm sure Mike Peirera (sp?) will give some b/s reason on the NFL network that justifies why he was whistled down, but I actually have to agree with the Wash. fans here, he should have been able to continue the play.
massraider
Footballguy
Perhaps he should have been allowed to get up, but in reality, he was on the ground, with his helmet off. He could have been seriously injured. I can just imagine a safety trying to state his case, after knocking Moss unconscious.
"Hey, I know he was lying on the ground with no helmet on, but see, he had not gained possession of the ball yet....."
Letter of the law or not, that was the correct call.
"Hey, I know he was lying on the ground with no helmet on, but see, he had not gained possession of the ball yet....."
Letter of the law or not, that was the correct call.
Last edited by a moderator:
Statcruncher
Footballguy
It was without a doubt a touchdown that was nullified by an early whistle. Refs have to knock the rust off too ya know.
T Bell
Footballguy
That was a key play IMHO. Moss (the fastest guy on the 'Skins roster) was going to take that to the house, which would have been a huge boost for Campbell and made that into a 2-point game. Of course Madden was too busy talking about turducken or whatever to be bothered to even comment on it, but that was a lousy call by the officials.
Statcruncher
Footballguy
It is the player's decision to continue a play or not when their helmet has been knocked off. He chose to continue the play. The refs errantly blew their whistle. It was not the correct call.
Lobary
Footballguy
It doesn't matter that the whistle blew or that he was not touched by a defender after establishing control of the ball. The controlling factor is Moss being contacted by the defender before 1) getting two feet down and 2) maintaining control of the ball.
That is the rule. It's really simple. He was down by contact because the defender caused him to go down. Just because he didn't complete the catch until after contact doesn't make him eligible to get up and run. Moss was on the ground and, therefore, down. The only question that remained at that point was whether he'd maintain sufficient control to award a completion.
That is the rule. It's really simple. He was down by contact because the defender caused him to go down. Just because he didn't complete the catch until after contact doesn't make him eligible to get up and run. Moss was on the ground and, therefore, down. The only question that remained at that point was whether he'd maintain sufficient control to award a completion.
Last edited by a moderator:
T Bell
Footballguy
Wrong. You can't be down by contact without possession of the ball. What are they going to do, whistle the play dead every time somebody falls down on the field, regardless of whether they have the ball?
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
Did the Giants players stop because they heard a whistle? I am sure if there was no whistle or arms waving it was in incomplete pass that maybe someone off the Giants would have stayed with the play. No? I mean it is easy to say Moss would have continued on with a TD, but that is not neccessairly true.
massraider
Footballguy
I think you could run that play a thousand times, and it would get blown dead every time. Correct or not. And not because his helmet was off, because from every angle, except between Moss' legs, he appeared to be down by contact, with possession of the ball. From almost every angle, he gets his helmet torn off, and hits the ground. Think th whistle may get blown a lttle quicker? I do.If Skins fans are wanting to call that a turning point, fine, but they are kidding themselves.
Statcruncher
Footballguy
Regardless, he would have most certainly been able to at least gain the extra yard to get a first down.
Bankerguy
Footballguy
Agreed, I think it was the wrong call. He had NOT secured possession of the ball, therefore could not be ruled down by contact.
Lobary
Footballguy
No, I'm right. Pereira was on NFLN Wednesday explaining the rationale for catch/no-catch rulings and coincidentally happened to give an explanation of a play very close to this one. Fact: if a receiver is contacted by a defender prior to the receiver establishing control of the ball AND two feet down, that receiver is considered to be "going to the ground." He cannot subsequently get up and run with it because the defender's actions caused him to hit the ground.
Statcruncher
Footballguy
No one in this thread called it a turning point. It was an incorrect call by the officials. Period.
Last edited by a moderator:
massraider
Footballguy
Actually Tatum Bell is.
Max Power
Footballguy
I dont think that is the case at all. Yes a defender knocked him down, but the play wasn't over yet. Moss had every right to advance the ball after that.It was a tough call. The refs missed it though.
Max Power
Footballguy
I think you need to add "once the WR makes contact with the football" otherwise this doesn't make sense.
Lobary
Footballguy
Nope. Ya'll don't understand the rule. He cannot get up and advance the ball--even though he didn't have control yet--because he was contacted by the defender and is therefore considered to be "going to the ground." If he'd simply fallen down, he could get up and run with it after the catch, but he's effectively dead at the point the pass play is completed.
Yeah and if somebody would have come in and Drilled him when he was thinking about getting up, because they say what Wash fans saw, the Wash fans are upset that The only offensive wepon on the team is being taken out on a stretcher. No in a play like that it is best to error on the side of caution and rule him down otherwise the league sees an increase in people getting hurt because someone is getting hit lying on the ground.
Last edited by a moderator:
T Bell
Footballguy
I'd like to see this for myself. If you have a link I'll take it, but otherwise I'll keep my eyes open for a replay on NFLN.
massraider
Footballguy
This is my understanding of the rule. If anyone has a link that disputes this, or the wording of the appropriate rule, I'd like to read it.
dgreen
Footballguy
So then you do get the hubbub?Why not just fully explain the rule in post 1 rather than baiting people in so you can tell them they're wrong?
Lobary
Footballguy
http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80a7b1bc
Here ya go. The discussion of catch/no-catch begins at about the 2:30 mark, but the specific explanation I'm referring to starts at about the 4:50 mark.
Here ya go. The discussion of catch/no-catch begins at about the 2:30 mark, but the specific explanation I'm referring to starts at about the 4:50 mark.
Does anyone have the actual rule, and is the rule specific enough? I am betting he is down by contact. If a Running Back is tackled and fumbles the ball, he can't repossess the ball then get up and run. He would have to get up, then pick up the ball and run. Once you are tackled you are tackled, until you get up, then you are 'untackled', at least in my thinking. But until someone produces the exact wording of the rule we are guessing.
Good call. I can't stand that guy.
Lobary
Footballguy
The video gives a good explanation.
dgreen
Footballguy
Fans are exposed to rules they didn't know every season, even ones that may have been on the books for a while. That's a real simple concept, too.
Max Power
Footballguy
So yes, once the WR makes contact with the football and a defender hits him, he is considered going to the ground.You left out the contact with the football part and that is what is confusing people.
If the runner was not down by contact, he could simply lose control of the ball when he is tackled and surround the ball without actually having control of it. Then when the defender is no longer touching him, he could get up and run. Seems like a BS play.
Statcruncher
Footballguy
I can't find the exact "down by contact" wording and NFL.com has nothing about it. From what I gather only a runner (someone who has established possession of the ball) can advance the ball and the only way to stop a runner is for them to down the ball themselves, run out of bounds, or be downed by the defense. If you have not established possession of the ball then by definition you are not the runner and cannot be downed by the defense until you establish possession of the ball. I could very easily be wrong here and don't have a horse in this fight as I'm a Bears fan. I would sure love for someone to link to the offical NFL rulebook and settle it once and for all.
The Ref
Footballguy
One thing that is being underplayed here is the fact that the players hat came off. You won't find this in any rulebook, but once a players helmet comes off there will always be a quick whistle. Combine that fact with a split second decision regarding possession and you can guarantee that a quick whistle will happen.
Dt's Mules
Footballguy
I don't know that this completely clears it up...he is talking about whether it will be a catch or not. He says the receiver is considered going to the ground (in reference to possession and catch/no catch) which is/could be different that being downed.
Last edited by a moderator:
Wasn't there a play last year with Braylon Edwards that might have some similarities to this discussion?Burning Sensation
Footballguy
Its not eluding so many Footballguys, just you, and maybe Massraider.A similar situation happened last year with Braylon Edwards, except the whistle wasnt blown. They reviewed it and gave him the TD, which was the correct call.
massraider
Footballguy
I am unclear on the rule, and look forward to Pierra explaining it this week.My position is that I think that play gets blown dead 100 out of 100 times, it would be tough for all the refs to see that he was still struggling to get possession, and as his hat was off, the quick whistle was to be expected.I think the refs screw up a lot, if this was indeed a screw-up, then it was a very understandable one. But I am imagining a WR going for a deep ball, getting hit as he jumps for a ball, and doesn't completely secure the ball until he is on the ground, with no one STILL touching him, and I still think he gets called down by contact. Just seems like the most logical way to call that. I could be wrong.
Ralph Furley
Footballguy
Can anybody link a video to the Moss play?
Ozymandias
Footballguy
The refs got it right, on many levels.
Saint
Footballguy
According to NFL.com rule book. The definition of a forward pass is
"A forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball."
Definition of "Down by Contact" according to Jerry Markbreit (former NFL OFFICIAL):
"An official shall declare dead ball and the down ended when a runner is contacted by a defensive player and he touches the ground with any part of his body, except his hands or feet. If, however, he regains his equilibrium after the contact and continues on his way before going to the ground, the down-by-contact rule would not be in effect." http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0,1727247.story
Now I am having trouble how you are "Down by Contact" if you have not completed the pass according to the NFL definition of a forward pass. In addition, you haven%t become the "runner" until you have established possession. Now ironically enough, if we were to watch the game again, I "believe" the official that blew the whistle was the Line Judge, who was facing the BACK of Moss. From that official%s perspective, the player was down, as he did not see the ball moving.
By NFL definition, once the whistle has blown the play is dead and could not be advanced. So even though the official got the call wrong, which he did IMHO, since the whistle was blown play over. Just poor positioning by the Judge blowing the whistle.
*EDITED: Added Down by Contact definition*
"A forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball."
Definition of "Down by Contact" according to Jerry Markbreit (former NFL OFFICIAL):
"An official shall declare dead ball and the down ended when a runner is contacted by a defensive player and he touches the ground with any part of his body, except his hands or feet. If, however, he regains his equilibrium after the contact and continues on his way before going to the ground, the down-by-contact rule would not be in effect." http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0,1727247.story
Now I am having trouble how you are "Down by Contact" if you have not completed the pass according to the NFL definition of a forward pass. In addition, you haven%t become the "runner" until you have established possession. Now ironically enough, if we were to watch the game again, I "believe" the official that blew the whistle was the Line Judge, who was facing the BACK of Moss. From that official%s perspective, the player was down, as he did not see the ball moving.
By NFL definition, once the whistle has blown the play is dead and could not be advanced. So even though the official got the call wrong, which he did IMHO, since the whistle was blown play over. Just poor positioning by the Judge blowing the whistle.
*EDITED: Added Down by Contact definition*
Last edited by a moderator:
Burning Sensation
Footballguy
I agree that it gets blown dead more times than not, but not 100 out of 100, as shown last year with Braylon Edwards, and that play was much closer than the Moss catch. Fact is though, they got the call wrong, but it is an easy mistake.Had Moss not caught the ball after being on the ground, it would have been ruled incomplete. He was never touched after actually catching the ball. The play should have been alowed to continue, and Moss knew it, thats why he got up and ran.
Here's somebody that knows football rather than just fantasy football. The rest of you guys are wrong so quit complaining as you don't know what you are talking about.
Burning Sensation
Footballguy
Similar threads
