Comments on: Owners should override Competition Committee on Calvin Johnson rule

By: frojo112963

frojo112963 — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 19:08:26 +0000

Again my two posts were removed. For what reason?……….

By: rpiotr01

rpiotr01 — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:54:43 +0000

The Bears almost made it to the super bowl because of that stupid rule. It needs to be amended before something truly horrible happens, like Vikings or Lions make it.

By: deep64blue

deep64blue — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 11:22:19 +0000

>>>So what’s wrong with requiring the player to catch the ball and to not allow it to touch the ground at any point in the process of making the catch?<<<

You still have the same problem – when is the process of making the catch complete?

By: chuckyd317

chuckyd317 — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 07:28:36 +0000

Everyone outside of Chicago knows that was a catch and a TD, Chicago won that game on a technicality and they know it. Say what you want, that single play in week 1 had a huge impact on the rest of the season for the Bears… If it were a catch and it was upheld the Bears lose, and Chicago is ruined early with a loss to the Lions, Calling for Lovie’s head and trying to recover from a loss to an awful Detroit team.. As it was, it was not a catch, Bears win, and their 1 extra game allows them to take week 17, which would have been for the Division, a little less serious… Either way, I believe it was a catch, how many body parts need to touch the ground before he is down?? Im pretty sure I saw 2 feet, a hip, a leg, a knee and a hand… Then in his 3rd act of movement puts his hand and the ball on the ground to get up and celebrate and it wiggles… BS… but on the other hand, secure the ball with 2 hands and we are not having this conversation… At the end of the day my Packers are still Super Bowl Champs and the Bears still suck…

By: abuckeye4ever

abuckeye4ever — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 06:52:28 +0000

A second point about the RULES from Mr. McKay. the RULES CLEARLY STATES which I am quoting what Mr. McKay said above is “you’ve got to secure control of the ball in your hands;” . Ok then, whoever makes a catch ONE HANDED then it is not a catch. He clearly states in YOUR HANDS !!! Does BOTH HANDS mean that you CLEARLY have the ball in POSSESSION ??? Need more clarity on this rule, thats for sure. And for Calvin Johnson, before he touched the ground with the ball was it in control in his hand before it touched the ground ? I did not see a bobble or falling out of the ball and his left hand was OUT OF BALANCE before the ball ever touched the ground. I think that makes it a CONTROLLED CATCH. So Control, 2 feet in, and crossed the goal one sounds like a touchdown catch.

By: abuckeye4ever

abuckeye4ever — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 06:44:11 +0000

I agree its a catch but there is one thing no one ever talks about the play. Calvin Johnson has both feet down then one hand down and then the fingers are out of balance before the ball touches the ground. So, he made the catch, both feet down, crossed the goal line and went out of balance before the ball touched the ground. What I hate is that a RB or WR can just extend the ball over the goal line and go out of balance or have the ball knocked out at that moment of crossing the goal line and still get a TD with out total control of the ball. Now go figure ???

By: 1liondriven

1liondriven — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 05:35:55 +0000

THE RULE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEN APPLIED TO CALVINS CATCH.

Calvin did not go to the ground to make the catch…in fact it was the complete opposite.

Calvin jumped up towards the sky!!!! Not the ground.

He jumped up, caught the ball with both hands establishing control as he came back down to earth, he landed with both feet on the ground. He then twisted slightly and went to the ground with the ball still in his control and then took one hand off the ball, while still maintaining control of the ball, and reached out with his free hand to control the ball on the ground. NOTE…AFTER he (ass) was on the ground and still in control of the ball he started to GET UP off the ground and was going to use the ball to help himself up when the ball came out of his hand. He was on the ground twice with control, 1 on both feet, 1 on his ass with control.
The play was over…he was getting UP from the ground when the ball came out. What more do you have to do pose for a picture? (Last line credit; T kowalski)

Probably the worst call in football.

The rule should not apply on this catch, that’s why they won’t change it!

By: ttommytom

ttommytom — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 05:09:43 +0000

I should have said this:

How did he not break the plane?

It is that simple…

By: ttommytom

ttommytom — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 05:07:42 +0000

What counts in the air as one crosses the goal line with the ball is by definition apples to oranges as per
the rest of the field. The break the plane is BS if Calvin’s catch is (and was) ruled incomplete. HE BROKE THE PLANE.

Calvin needs to learn the rules beyond what he KNOWS (and we all know) is a catch. Just take the ball with you as far as you can. Take the ball home and drop it on your mantle if need be.

We all know it was a catch and those in the know do not know how to address it regarding the breaking of the plane of the goal. YOU CAN’T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS…

By: mayfieldroadboy

mayfieldroadboy — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 05:03:33 +0000

Oops! I stand corrected: the last statement should read “and getting refs who have no bias for either team.

By: bucfandango

bucfandango — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 05:03:08 +0000

Spoken like a true Lawyer. I didn’t understand a single word of McKay’s statement. He now qualifies to be a Whitehouse Press Secretary.

Can we also clarify what constitutes a Lion’s pass interference penalty?

By: mayfieldroadboy

mayfieldroadboy — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 05:01:11 +0000

What was his spiel about “live” action and super “slow motion”? Does he recommend that all those nail-biting reviews in super, super-slow motion be eliminated for what can be determined by the naked eye in real time? Sounds like a good argument for doing away with instant replay. And getting refs who have no bias in either team.

By: irchs1963

irchs1963 — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 04:41:53 +0000

Why establish a Competition Committee….. only to have Ownership ‘overide’ unpopular decisions made by that Committee.

By: ursushorribilis

ursushorribilis — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 04:12:23 +0000

Come now, there were many other instances where the “no catch” rule was enforced……it is a good rule: Have the receivers COMPLETE the act and then HOT DOG IT…..

Premature HOTDOGGINIT is just STUPID!

By: klunge

klunge — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:59:00 +0000

johnjosephyossarian says:
Mar 16, 2011 10:57 PM
So I know I’m in the horrible minority, but put me in the group that doesn’t think the rule needed to be changed. I saw a guy drop the ball at the last second.
————————————————

Yeah, and there’s a reason you’re in the minority. Watch the several seconds BEFORE the “last second” and it’s plain as day it was a catch.
1. Caught ball with TWO HANDS, and had both feet on ground in the end zone.
2. Starts to fall backwards (taking about 3 steps), palming the ball in his giant right hand (full control).
3. Lands on his butt (completely inbounds) using left hand to brace himself (still controls ball).
4. Rolls over to push himself up, using the ball, which he leaves deliberately on the ground as he is convinced he made game-winning catch.

By: lionsfan14

lionsfan14 — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:58:35 +0000

can i get a thumbs up for td catch and thumbs down for no catch

By: lightninglucci

lightninglucci — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:54:20 +0000

@realfann says:

“Surely the problem is with a catch that starts one side of the goal line and finishes on the other.

Calvin Johnson would have been awarded a TD if he had started the catch in the field of play then then maintained possession as the ball crossed the plane. Anything that happened after that point (ball placed on ground etc) would not have mattered. A TD would have been awarded by rule.”

A lot of people seem to think this, but this is not true. This rule applies as-is anywhere on the field, regardless of the end zone.

Because the rule declares the catch invalid and the pass incomplete, he never technically had possession. And by “possession” I mean all three things: control in hands, correct body part(s) down, and whatever that “third element” is that they can’t seem to adequately explain.

So, no matter where he starts that catch and no matter where it ends with that so-called “drop”, it’s still all considered incomplete. No touchdown. No gain of X yards. Bottom line, no catch.

By: sfsaintsfan

sfsaintsfan — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:51:04 +0000

“the vague “second act” exception that was used, despite not appearing in the rule book, during Super Bowl XLIV, when Saints receiver Lance Moore caught the ball while falling down near the goal line, reached the ball across the plane while falling, lost possession of the ball upon hitting the ground, and ultimately was awarded two points via a ruling that the catch was valid.”

Mike, you continue to miss the point on this play. Lance Moore caught the ball, reached the ball across the goal line while in the air and only after scoring the 2 point conversion was the ball knocked out of his hands by a defender. He DID NOT lose possession of the ball upon hitting the ground!!! He caught the ball, made a football move with the ball, a “second act”, and he did not lose possession of the ball until after he scored the 2 point conversion and the ball was knocked out of his hands by a defender. The ground had nothing to do with it.

I do think the Megatron catch was a catch for what it is worth, but I also see the distinction. Did you really go to law school and pass the bar?

By: Deb

Deb — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:22:14 +0000

That was a catch. But the issue is bigger than one play. Eliminate challenge flags, sideline “hoods,” and nitpicking nonsense. Give us simple rules and booth replay officials who instantly check everything. Bad calls shouldn’t stand because a coach didn’t have time to throw a flag or was out of challenges. How stupid is that? No one cares if officials apologize or players are fined after the game. Get it right when it counts!

By: bleedsoe9mm

bleedsoe9mm — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:04:36 +0000

I have no idea what a catch is anymore !

By: johnjosephyossarian

johnjosephyossarian — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 02:57:16 +0000

So I know I’m in the horrible minority, but put me in the group that doesn’t think the rule needed to be changed. I saw a guy drop the ball at the last second.

By: heyooooh

heyooooh — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 02:37:53 +0000

I fell asleep after “Let me give you a couple of things that we started at.”

By: pestilence1972

pestilence1972 — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 02:28:41 +0000

I still think that a rule that simply asks the question: is it a catch or not makes more sense than all these rules. Either way, it is subjective. So let’s just have the ref admit a judgement call as opposed to trying to leverage subjective interpretation of lame rules that make no common sense.

By: realfann

realfann — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 02:27:43 +0000

“folks who in varying degrees of intoxication to understand when a catch is a catch”

So the refs are drunk?

Explains a lot.

By: johnnycash19

johnnycash19 — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 02:16:10 +0000

“number two, you’ve got to maintain that control when you have two feet down or any body part other than your hands;”
“in which you would have the ability to perform any act common to the game.”
———-
So when Calvin Johnson had 2 feet, a thigh and his ass on the ground, while holding the ball firmly with one hand, while bracing his fall with the other hand, he didn’t have possession nor perform a “common act”? I don’t know about you but I think holding a ball in one hand while bracing your fall with the second is a “second/ common football act”.

By: batmanofpintucky

batmanofpintucky — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 02:14:37 +0000

Cry Lions fans cry

By: burkem325

burkem325 — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 02:14:07 +0000

It wasn’t a catch! Ball hit the ground and popped out. The rule book is clear as crystal to me.

By: realfann

realfann — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 02:12:11 +0000

Surely the problem is with a catch that starts one side of the goal line and finishes on the other.

By: 1liondriven

1liondriven — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 02:10:10 +0000

They should overrule them or get the league to sign a waiver that indemnifies the team from any liability in regards to health and well being of the refs.

This is not a threat, but If this happens again, I hope they’re not playing in Detroit because somebody could get seriously hurt, and it won’t be a black eye for Detroit it will be a black eye for the NFL.

Lets be honest, this is the Motorcity…not San Francisco, in the D we lead with our chin and fight with our heart. We could care less about another black eye.

By: geeeeemen

geeeeemen — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 01:56:38 +0000

Lengthy article but I agree in that leaving the rule the way it is is the wrong move. I dont know what the owners can do really, but the competition committee is really ‘dropping the ball’ with this one.

Thumbs down for corny pun.