|
Would you have given the man the catch or not? https://twitter.com/BleacherReport/status/1480971108010631173
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 01:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 22:49 |
|
|
CocoaNuts posted:Would you have given the man the catch or not? Mike McCarthy not wasting a challenge is truly a historic moment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 02:22
|
|
|
umm gently caress the Dallas Cowboys
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 02:33
|
|
|
By today's standards it's a catch, without a doubt. With the old standards who loving knows I can't even remember what they really were beyond making no sense
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 21:14
|
|
|
Even if I think it was a catch the game was over anyway. Cowboys defense could not stop Rodgers. The whole thing still sucks complete rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2022 23:17
|
|
|
Play posted:By today's standards it's a catch, without a doubt. With the old standards who loving knows I can't even remember what they really were beyond making no sense Remember the Calvin Johnson non catch?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 00:00
|
|
|
don't know
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 00:07
|
|
|
That was definitely a catch. Horrible horrible call. He catches it and is clearly reaching it forward to try to score the TD! If that's not "a football move" then what is
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 00:08
|
|
|
Kawalimus posted:That was definitely a catch. Horrible horrible call. He catches it and is clearly reaching it forward to try to score the TD! If that's not "a football move" then what is Agreed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 02:49
|
|
|
Wasn't that before the new catch rules and the phrase 'football move' became a thing though? Or no
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 02:55
|
|
|
Play posted:Wasn't that before the new catch rules and the phrase 'football move' became a thing though? Or no The phrase "Football move" is right in the video. I'm pretty sure that phrase has been around at least since I started watching in 99/2000. Even if there was some ambiguity the call should have stood. The call on the field is supposed to be deferred to in such situations but refs routinely break this guideline. Kawalimus fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Jan 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 03:27
|
|
|
Kawalimus posted:That was definitely a catch. Horrible horrible call. He catches it and is clearly reaching it forward to try to score the TD! If that's not "a football move" then what is
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 04:02
|
|
|
The Cowboys were hosed by the call? Then objectively it had to be the correct call. gently caress the Cowboys. It was a catch.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 04:11
|
|
|
fartknocker posted:The Cowboys were hosed by the call? Then objectively it had to be the correct call. gently caress the Cowboys. I agree with this sentiment on principle but if I remember correctly the exact same bullshit hosed the lions the week prior and that's just not right.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 17:15
|
|
|
Was a catch then, and a catch now. Romo 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 18:22
|
|
|
Kawalimus posted:The phrase "Football move" is right in the video. I'm pretty sure that phrase has been around at least since I started watching in 99/2000. So what I was actually thinking about here was the simplification of the catch rule in 2018, which made it ONLY control of the ball, two feet or another body part down, and a football move. This was the really confusing element of the catch rule before 2018, and the one that was relevant here. The 'going to the ground' part of the rule: quote:A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete." That rule was an absolute clusterfuck and honestly the NFL simplifying the catch rule by cutting that out was one of the few smart things they've ever done
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 20:37
|
|
|
Eifert Posting posted:I agree with this sentiment on principle but if I remember correctly the exact same bullshit hosed the lions the week prior and that's just not right. Yeah, this was part in the weirdest series of karma I've seen in football. The Lions got hosed over to start it and the Cowboys benefited. That next week, the Cowboys got hosed over by this call, and the Packers benefited. Then, in the NFC Championship Game, the Packers didn't get hosed over by refs, but lost to the Seahawks in the stupidest comeback possible. Finally, the Super Bowl had the Seahawks losing on The Interception to the Patriots, ending the chain because nothing bad ever happens to the Patriots.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 20:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 22:49 |
|
|
Pungry posted:Yeah, this was part in the weirdest series of karma I've seen in football. The Lions got hosed over to start it and the Cowboys benefited. That next week, the Cowboys got hosed over by this call, and the Packers benefited. Then, in the NFC Championship Game, the Packers didn't get hosed over by refs, but lost to the Seahawks in the stupidest comeback possible. Finally, the Super Bowl had the Seahawks losing on The Interception to the Patriots, ending the chain because nothing bad ever happens to the Patriots. Hey man, that INT was preceded almost immediately by a bullshit circus catch by Kearse
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 21:18
|
|