Baltimore same play as Stevie's TD call back

[Big B]

Why was the two fumbles by Bills receivers ruled fumbles then? The receivers made less of a football move before losing the ball on both of those fumbles than they did on that incomplete call.

I never said I agreed with those calls. However those are completely different scenarios because those plays had nothing to do with GOING TO THE GROUND and completing the catch. If you want my opinion, I don't think those should be fumbles.

[Herb]

I don't have a link. And yes he did have control before going into the endzone. But you're misunderstanding the rule about going to the ground.

N.F.L. Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 1: Going to the ground. 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 after he touches 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. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

He was going to the ground. Therefore he must maintain possession throughout the entire catch. It does not matter that he crossed the goal line with possession. Because he didn't maintain possession while going to the ground.

but he had both feet down before going to the ground and crossing the plane. he actually dove into the endzone after he caught it, which is different

[Big B]

thank you! big b needs glasses.

And you need to read the NFL rule book.

[Big B]

but he had both feet down before going to the ground and crossing the plane. he actually dove into the endzone after he caught it, which is different

That literally does not matter. He was going to the ground. It's a dumb rule, but it's a rule. Where were you during the huge Calvin Johnson controversy in 2010? He got both feet down too. No catch. Read the rule that I posted again. Read it 3 times if you have to. I hate the rule. It's dumb. It sucks. It isn't fair. It makes no sense. But it's the rule, and it was interpreted correctly.

[Herb]

That literally does not matter. He was going to the ground. It's a dumb rule, but it's a rule. Where were you during the huge Calvin Johnson controversy in 2010? He got both feet down too. No catch. Read the rule that I posted again. Read it 3 times if you have to. I hate the rule. It's dumb. It sucks. It isn't fair. It makes no sense. But it's the rule, and it was interpreted correctly.

so, when a runner, (having possession of the ball and both feet down in bounds before he crosses the plane of the goal line), dives into the endzone and loses the ball when he hits the ground...it's no td?

[Herb]

once a receiver catches a pass he becomes a runner. therefore, if that runner crosses the plane of the goal line...it's a td.

[Rochesterfan]

once a receiver catches a pass he becomes a runner. therefore, if that runner crosses the plane of the goal line...it's a td.

Correct - except for the fact that Johnson tried to dive after taking the 2 steps. If he stayed on his feet - Touchdown, but that is not what he did. Johnson dove forward and therefore the rule changes - he is not judged to have possession or made the catch until he completes that action of going to the ground.

So no matter how many times you want to repeat that he was a runner - they did not rule it a catch because he dove and then needed to complete the action. It is right there in the rule quoted earlier. This happens all of the time and it may suck - but that is the current rule.

Sorry.

[Big B]

so, when a runner, (having possession of the ball and both feet down in bounds before he crosses the plane of the goal line), dives into the endzone and loses the ball when he hits the ground...it's no td?

It most definitely is a TD.
Unfortunately Stevie was not a runner because he had not yet completed the action of catching the ball because he went to the ground.

[Herb]

It most definitely is a TD.
Unfortunately Stevie was not a runner because he had not yet completed the action of catching the ball because he went to the ground.

i think he dove to the ground after making the catch. we are arguing about nothing i suppose. we'll have to agree to disagree.