OK, so in last night's game, Wallace caught a ball, took three steps, got hammered, and lost the ball which went out of bounds. Called catch, challenged and upheld. If the defender would have hit him from behind, knocked him to the ground, and he lost the ball, would that fall under the Calvin Johnson/Arian Foster rule and have been ruled an incompletion? I'm not understanding the difference between all the rulings. Anyone know what the difference is?
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!
What is the difference? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter kerntuber
- Start date
JoeyJoeJoeJrShabadoo
Footballguy
Different refs?
RedskinsFan
Footballguy
Your not alone, none of this crap makes sense anymore. Arian Fosters TD called back Sunday was a TD to me and the catch you mention about Wallace was a catch to me too. And Megatrons catch that started all that mess was a TD. The officals got stuck on stupid in the brain for those not to be TD's and catches. Any other year in the NFL and those stand then this one. Makes no sense at all and I expect the rules committee to put this to death in the offseason.
Sam Quentin
Footballguy
Accorrding the misinterpretation currently in vogue, yes. If had landed slightly off balance and fallen he never would have "completed the process" of going to the ground
belljr
Footballguy
Wallace maintained possession and took 3 steps before getting hit. Even if he was hit and tackled and he was falling down probably still ruled a catch and fumble because he would have been "running" after the catch.
The others they were hit just after "catching" and were falling to the ground OR fell to the ground on their own. If you are forced to the ground while catching OR go to the ground to make a catch you have to maintain possession completely until a whistle OR you get up with the ball.
I know they go rid of the football move verbiage but they still use it to some extent. If Wallace was hit a step sooner I think it would have been incomplete.
The others they were hit just after "catching" and were falling to the ground OR fell to the ground on their own. If you are forced to the ground while catching OR go to the ground to make a catch you have to maintain possession completely until a whistle OR you get up with the ball.
I know they go rid of the football move verbiage but they still use it to some extent. If Wallace was hit a step sooner I think it would have been incomplete.
Blind Tiger
Footballguy
There's the difference. He was no longer in the act of catching the ball, had demonstrated possession and then fumbled out of bounds. It's not the ref's fault. The rule is poorly written and will probably be changed after this season. These calls have been made for a few years, but are being dissected this season because of the CJ incident that very possibly would have changed the outcome of that game.
DocHolliday
Footballguy
On Sunday, Austin Collie made a catch, took 3 steps, put his head down to prepare for the tackle by 2 Eagle players, and fumbled. It was ruled an incomplete pass and the Eagles were penalized for head-to-head contact. The NFL better straighten out their rules and refs soon or the game is going to be a joke.
JoeyJoeJoeJrShabadoo
Footballguy
Too late.
Black
Footballguy
He had possession of the ball and was running with it (similar to the three steps Santonio took)....in that case, the ball just has to break the plane.In the case of Arian Foster, the ball is in his hands...he takes a step (or two) and crosses the Goal Line but is stilll in the process of catching the ball as he falls to the ground...he puts the ball down to help break his fall, so it's no catch, no TD.
jackdubl
Footballguy
Catching while going to the ground is completely different from catching while not going to the ground. Completely different rules=completely different outcomes. If you don't understand why one is a catch and one isn't, then read the rules. It's in black and white.
On that Collie play, I can't remember how many steps he took before he got blasted.
On that Collie play, I can't remember how many steps he took before he got blasted.
Come on man. Wallace never even went to the ground...and had taken 3 or 4 steps BEFORE he got touched at all. The rule you're asking about involves going to the ground in the act of making the catch...clearly not the case here.
This one was easy, and obvious.
This one was easy, and obvious.
Blind Tiger
Footballguy
Collie got two feet down before he was contacted by a defender, not quite his third. It could be argued that he didn't make a "football move" and that is why it was incomplete. Much more questionable than the Wallace catch and fumble.
jackdubl
Footballguy
Sounds like Collie was entering that grey area between not long enough and long enough. Kinda like Arian Foster was in that grey area between going to the ground and making a move.
footballnerd
Footballguy
See Calvin Johnson Week 8 for proper stretch TD.Wallace was def running with the ball.Foster: If someone has to prop themselves up with the ball they are falling forward. Still hate the rule.
Similar threads
