That Santana Moss play everyone's confused about (2 Viewers)

[CalBear]

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.

Actually, in the NCAA rulebook there is a specific rule that the play is dead if the runner has completely lost his helmet. Don't know if that's true in the NFL.

 

[CalBear]

It's worth watching this play again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9N49ObxaGE

But it turns out not to be relevant, as Freeman didn't appear to be touched at all before he went to the ground.

 

[apalmer]

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.

Actually, in the NCAA rulebook there is a specific rule that the play is dead if the runner has completely lost his helmet. Don't know if that's true in the NFL.

Obviously not--remember Witten running down the field helmetless last year?

 

[Lobary]

No, Dgreen, I don't get it. It's a real simple concept and I don't understand how it can elude so many footballguys.

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.

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.

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.

No, they got the call right. How the hell do you think he ended up on the ground? BECAUSE THE DEFENDER PUT HIM THERE. The fact that he was unable to complete the catch until after being on the ground does not mean that he can get up and run with it. The defensive player already made the required play.

 

[Burning Sensation]

No, Dgreen, I don't get it. It's a real simple concept and I don't understand how it can elude so many footballguys.

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.

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.

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.

No, they got the call right. How the hell do you think he ended up on the ground? BECAUSE THE DEFENDER PUT HIM THERE. The fact that he was unable to complete the catch until after being on the ground does not mean that he can get up and run with it. The defensive player already made the required play.

Whatever, you win.

 

[Sam Quentin]

If somebody could post the text of the actual rule, we could end this pissing contest.

 

[Burning Sensation]

If somebody could post the text of the actual rule, we could end this pissing contest.

The only one trying to win a pissing contest is Lobary. I am not going to go back and forth trying to convince someone 2+2=4.

 

[bleachercreacher]

If I remember correctly I thought that Washington should have challenged the play. I don't think that the wistle was blown until Moss was up and running. I could be remembering wrong though. The refs would've seen the replay and seen that he did not catch the ball until after laying on the ground. The call then would've been inadvertant wistle and the Skins would've gotten the ball where Moss was when the wistle was blown. I think he was past the first down marker at this point.

 

[GregR_2]

If somebody could post the text of the actual rule, we could end this pissing contest.

The rules in the rule book do not give a specific answer. They've been pretty close to posted already. This comes down to one of those point of emphasis or interpretation kind of things.The down by contact rule just says:7.4.1.c 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, ball shall be declared dead immediately.The rule on pass completion could have changed (my copy of the rulebook is 2 years old now). But I doubt it did other than the push out part. Anyway, it reads:8.1.7 supplemental note 4. A pass is completed or intercepted if the player has both feet or any other part of his body, except his hands, inbounds prior to and after the catch.The problem is that I think they don't change the rule wording for interpretative changes like going to the ground. Just like they didn't change the pass interference wording 3 or so years ago, they changed the interpretation of it to be stricter.Edit to add: And apparently the 2008 copy of the rule book isn't coming out until mid-October. I'd planned to get the new copy this year to have any current changes, but I'm not sure I'll bother if the season will be half over by the time it comes out.