CPFC BBS

CPFC BBS (https://www.cpfc.org/forums/index.php)
-   World of Sport (https://www.cpfc.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=15)
-   -   The NFL thread (https://www.cpfc.org/forums/showthread.php?t=137231)

saxoneagle 15-09-2010 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swanny32
Well the Jets fans were still drinking shit loads inside.


That is known as drowning sorrows. :p

jazman 15-09-2010 09:36 PM

Loving the look back on the C4 coverage at the weekend ... 1982 seems such a long time ago now!

Swanny32 15-09-2010 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saxoneagle
That is known as drowning sorrows. :p

From the start? Animals, absolute animals. No way the eagles fans are the worst fans in the league.

pauldrulez 15-09-2010 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swanny32
From the start? Animals, absolute animals. No way the eagles fans are the worst fans in the league.

I think Pete can testify to that after an experience a couple of years back.

saxoneagle 16-09-2010 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pauldrulez
I think Pete can testify to that after an experience a couple of years back.


I'd still rather go into Giant Stadium wearing a Pats shirt and winding the Jets up than doing the same in Philly.

No brainer.

Besides, it was only a pint or two of beer they poured on me :D

saxoneagle 16-09-2010 12:46 PM

So, Calvin Johnson's "catch".

Was it or wasn't it? I've read and watched a few opinions on a few websites but what do BBSers think? Is there enough in the rule to cause such confusion? I can see the argument for both giving the TD and not giving it. Should the rule be amended slightly or is this just not required?

CJ clearly has control of the ball throughout the entire catch and it is just when he pushes himself up to celebrate it comes free. He had both feet, a knee, a hand all down before the ball. Comparing the situation to a RB making a stretch for crossing the plane - if his knee goes down before he crosses the play is dead when his knee touches. Why isn't this the same for a WR who clearly had full control of the football?

I'm still not sure which way I'd have made the call, even having read the rule and seen the play and heard others analyse it. Like the offside rule which is supposed to give the benefit of tight calls to the attacking side, should NFL have something similar and allow the refs to also apply some common sense?

Edenbridge Eagle In Exile 16-09-2010 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saxoneagle
I'd still rather go into Giant Stadium wearing a Pats shirt and winding the Jets up than doing the same in Philly.

No brainer.

Besides, it was only a pint or two of beer they poured on me :D

:angel: :moo: ;)

jazman 16-09-2010 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saxoneagle
So, Calvin Johnson's "catch".

Was it or wasn't it? I've read and watched a few opinions on a few websites but what do BBSers think? Is there enough in the rule to cause such confusion? I can see the argument for both giving the TD and not giving it. Should the rule be amended slightly or is this just not required?

CJ clearly has control of the ball throughout the entire catch and it is just when he pushes himself up to celebrate it comes free. He had both feet, a knee, a hand all down before the ball. Comparing the situation to a RB making a stretch for crossing the plane - if his knee goes down before he crosses the play is dead when his knee touches. Why isn't this the same for a WR who clearly had full control of the football?

I'm still not sure which way I'd have made the call, even having read the rule and seen the play and heard others analyse it. Like the offside rule which is supposed to give the benefit of tight calls to the attacking side, should NFL have something similar and allow the refs to also apply some common sense?

Interesting. As my thought was that when a player breaks the end zone line it's a TD and as you said CJ had control in the catch so I thought it was a TD.

I've thought more about the Cowboys game ending TD that wasn't against the Skins. Do officials take into account whether a held player would get to the QB and effect the play? My view is that Orakpo would have probably got to Romo before he threw to the end zone so it's a duff argument but just wondered if it was deemed that the play would not have been effected, would they have let it go ....

pauldrulez 16-09-2010 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saxoneagle
So, Calvin Johnson's "catch".

Was it or wasn't it? I've read and watched a few opinions on a few websites but what do BBSers think? Is there enough in the rule to cause such confusion? I can see the argument for both giving the TD and not giving it. Should the rule be amended slightly or is this just not required?

CJ clearly has control of the ball throughout the entire catch and it is just when he pushes himself up to celebrate it comes free. He had both feet, a knee, a hand all down before the ball. Comparing the situation to a RB making a stretch for crossing the plane - if his knee goes down before he crosses the play is dead when his knee touches. Why isn't this the same for a WR who clearly had full control of the football?

I'm still not sure which way I'd have made the call, even having read the rule and seen the play and heard others analyse it. Like the offside rule which is supposed to give the benefit of tight calls to the attacking side, should NFL have something similar and allow the refs to also apply some common sense?

First off, I think that the rule is poorly written.

Second, I think Megatron should have got up with the ball in his hands anyway to prove the point. It even looked like he done it as part of his celebration.

I think the refs need to use their own intuition at times with plays like this.

Does he have the ball securely (in one or 2 hands)? Was it knocked out? Did he drop it or did it fall out after he made the clear catch?

As one analyst said: "If 9 out of 10 men in a bar see that and think it's a Touchdown, then it's a Touchdown". Everywhere i've looked, people think it's a TD.

It's a shame, because the Lions could be a 8-8 team this year with a bit of luck. Stafford getting hurt and that TD catch could cost them 3 or 4 games.

pauldrulez 16-09-2010 03:46 PM

Nervous about this weekend.

I'm excited about Palace on Saturday and watching the Jets game on Sunday.

But I know both have the potential to make next week the most miserable one ever for me should both lose.

I'm on a high after the Bengals and Portsmouth games. Made the week go really quick.

I don't mind losing to the Phins in a few weeks if we slaughter the Jets on Sunday.

For once, I think there are a decent amount of fans rooting for the Patriots against the Green Jackasses.

saxoneagle 16-09-2010 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jazman
Interesting. As my thought was that when a player breaks the end zone line it's a TD and as you said CJ had control in the catch so I thought it was a TD.

I've thought more about the Cowboys game ending TD that wasn't against the Skins. Do officials take into account whether a held player would get to the QB and effect the play? My view is that Orakpo would have probably got to Romo before he threw to the end zone so it's a duff argument but just wondered if it was deemed that the play would not have been effected, would they have let it go ....


Holding is holding wherever it happens, I believe. Is there a case for making it like offside in football where you can be "not involved in the play"? I'm not sure it would work though as often the play called breaks down and changes direction meaning that a hold straight off the line might not look to be important but then if the QB steps up into the pocket and scrambles a few yards then all of a sudden a hold might become key.

saxoneagle 16-09-2010 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pauldrulez
Nervous about this weekend.

I'm excited about Palace on Saturday and watching the Jets game on Sunday.

But I know both have the potential to make next week the most miserable one ever for me should both lose.

I'm on a high after the Bengals and Portsmouth games. Made the week go really quick.

I don't mind losing to the Phins in a few weeks if we slaughter the Jets on Sunday.

For once, I think there are a decent amount of fans rooting for the Patriots against the Green Jackasses.

I'm going for wins for the two Ps - Palace and Patriots.

One will be 2-0 and the other will be 21-10. I'm not telling you who I think will score the 21 goals for Palace though ;)

pauldrulez 16-09-2010 04:32 PM

Brandon Spikes Safety to win the game :lux:

Vince Hilaire's Afro 18-09-2010 03:00 AM

Managed to snaffle 2 free lower level tickets to Panthers - Bucs today. Hardly two behemoths of the NFL, but hoping for some fun and games.

elliott 18-09-2010 03:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saxoneagle
So, Calvin Johnson's "catch".

Was it or wasn't it? I've read and watched a few opinions on a few websites but what do BBSers think? Is there enough in the rule to cause such confusion? I can see the argument for both giving the TD and not giving it. Should the rule be amended slightly or is this just not required?

CJ clearly has control of the ball throughout the entire catch and it is just when he pushes himself up to celebrate it comes free. He had both feet, a knee, a hand all down before the ball. Comparing the situation to a RB making a stretch for crossing the plane - if his knee goes down before he crosses the play is dead when his knee touches. Why isn't this the same for a WR who clearly had full control of the football?

I'm still not sure which way I'd have made the call, even having read the rule and seen the play and heard others analyse it. Like the offside rule which is supposed to give the benefit of tight calls to the attacking side, should NFL have something similar and allow the refs to also apply some common sense?


I think it was 05-06 the Bucs (against the Redskins) didn't make the playoffs with about 1 minute to spare in regulation because Joey Galloway didn't come up with the ball. Clean catch, few paces, went down, didn't come up with it. It seemed ludicrous at the time. I was very surprised nothing more was made of that!

Hedgehog 18-09-2010 03:54 AM

Field goals = 2 points.... punts... no punts on 4th down = improvement.

RDSdaEAGLE 18-09-2010 07:22 AM

Hoping to take my brother to see the Raiders play the Texans in a few weeks. He nor I have been to a game before, and we're aiming to go with a work colleague. He's a Texans fan, so it could be interesting :D

I watched some high school football this evening - my mother-in-law's school lost heavily to their local rivals who had a great running game - t'was fun to see a bit of football though :p

Strathclyde Eagle 18-09-2010 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hedgehog
Field goals = 2 points.... punts... no punts on 4th down = improvement.

Can't agree with this. Don't think scoring needs to be fixed at all (unlike Rugby Union where a try has gone from 3 to 5 points over my lifetime and still England rely on kicking to win).

oz_da II 18-09-2010 12:14 PM

No punters? :eek:

What would retired has-been Australian Rules Football players do with their time?

Vince Hilaire's Afro 18-09-2010 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strathclyde Eagle
Can't agree with this. Don't think scoring needs to be fixed at all (unlike Rugby Union where a try has gone from 3 to 5 points over my lifetime and still England rely on kicking to win).

I think I would like to see a TD having to be scored to win in overtime rather than a field goal.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.