- Joined
- Feb 9, 2021
- Messages
- 14,397
Before I explain what in the **** happened, let me be perfectly clear: I was 100% certain they will call it as "stands" and to be perfectly honest, if they do that, that is their view. I was shocked when they did not, glad of course, but shocked, because I was 100% sure that they would not reverse it.
To call this a TD in the first place is absolutely ridiculous and absurd. At absolutely no point did a ref see anything other than players fighting for the ball and then a Miami player running out of the endzone. They guessed and went "lets call it a TD, we have review afterwards".
Now, on to the rulebook. Social media has been going crazy the entire night going why it was a catch. Here is why it was not:
Rule 2, Section 4, Article 3:
The reasons why it was not called a catch are in bold. It was the good old "survive the ground" rule that was actually correctly used here. Now, people will obviously yap something about "oh it was long enough for him to maintain possession"... number 3 in combination with c eliminates that. They landed on the ground fighting for the ball and it popped out, touching a Miami player who was out of bounds, making it an incomplete pass. People tried to rule it a simultanious possession... kinda hard when the ball pops out.
There was also talk about the Miami player being illegally out of bounds. He is forced out of bounds and touches the ball with the status of being out of bounds, ruling the ball immediately out of bounds, which is the same as if a player fields the ball that is in bounds whilst standing out of bounds. In regards to the VT player landing on another VT who was clearly out of bounds, I could not find anything on that (and it appears that the officials did not make the ruling based on a potential rule in that regard). People even tried to argue that the player had possession when his foot touched the ground and that was enough... these people should just be ignored, they dont know **** about football rules in the first place and have not paid any attention over the past ten years.
As much as people want to ***** and complain about the play and the process on that, the call on the field was wrong and it was correctly corrected. The fact that the main argument is "the on-field-call was incorrect but the play should have stood" is absolutely laughable and a different type of delusion. We did not ***** about the clear cut wrong fumble call last year against GT that ended up in a loss and nobody picked up on that either, yet here, the wrong call on the field should stand. ******* ridiculous.
So, if you have annoying friends, coworkers or relatives *****ing... there you go. This thread will help you out.
Source for the rules: https://rulebook.github.io/en/rules/2/sections/4/
To call this a TD in the first place is absolutely ridiculous and absurd. At absolutely no point did a ref see anything other than players fighting for the ball and then a Miami player running out of the endzone. They guessed and went "lets call it a TD, we have review afterwards".
Now, on to the rulebook. Social media has been going crazy the entire night going why it was a catch. Here is why it was not:
Rule 2, Section 4, Article 3:
- To catch a ball means that a player:
- Secures control of a live ball in flight before the ball touches the ground, and
- Touches the ground in bounds with any part of his body, and then
- Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., and
- Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
- If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent) he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also required for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and going to the ground out of bounds. If he loses control of the ball which then touches the ground before he regains control, it is not a catch. If he regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is a catch.
- If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the ground with any part of his body, or if there is doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; he must lose control of the ball in order for there to be a loss of possession.
- If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control and continues to maintain control, and the elements above are satisfied, it is a catch.
The reasons why it was not called a catch are in bold. It was the good old "survive the ground" rule that was actually correctly used here. Now, people will obviously yap something about "oh it was long enough for him to maintain possession"... number 3 in combination with c eliminates that. They landed on the ground fighting for the ball and it popped out, touching a Miami player who was out of bounds, making it an incomplete pass. People tried to rule it a simultanious possession... kinda hard when the ball pops out.
There was also talk about the Miami player being illegally out of bounds. He is forced out of bounds and touches the ball with the status of being out of bounds, ruling the ball immediately out of bounds, which is the same as if a player fields the ball that is in bounds whilst standing out of bounds. In regards to the VT player landing on another VT who was clearly out of bounds, I could not find anything on that (and it appears that the officials did not make the ruling based on a potential rule in that regard). People even tried to argue that the player had possession when his foot touched the ground and that was enough... these people should just be ignored, they dont know **** about football rules in the first place and have not paid any attention over the past ten years.
As much as people want to ***** and complain about the play and the process on that, the call on the field was wrong and it was correctly corrected. The fact that the main argument is "the on-field-call was incorrect but the play should have stood" is absolutely laughable and a different type of delusion. We did not ***** about the clear cut wrong fumble call last year against GT that ended up in a loss and nobody picked up on that either, yet here, the wrong call on the field should stand. ******* ridiculous.
So, if you have annoying friends, coworkers or relatives *****ing... there you go. This thread will help you out.
Source for the rules: https://rulebook.github.io/en/rules/2/sections/4/
