If reaching the ball for the goal line isn't a football move they need to change the rules

[Used 2 B Hu]

He did have the ball, and he did reach towards the goal-line, but because he was still falling from the act of catching the ball, this does not constitute a football move, and he MUST maintain control of the ball when he hits the ground, and when the ball hits the ground. The ball hits the ground, and comes loose, and it's an incompletion. They got the call correct.

His right foot hits the ground. He even pushes off with it, kicking up a little turf. It's not like he went from being airborne to landing on his arms. You and I will never agree on this, I guess, but I just don't see how he doesn't have control of that ball prior to it striking the ground.

 

[Oldschool739]

Mike Pereira just admitted that a "football move" is a subjective call, not an objective one. So in other words, the refs actually could have gone either way with the call, and the league could have supported their decision either way. So much for this being as black and white as some stated it was.

There you go !!, exactly what I was talking about......At a refs discretion, is unacceptable and flawed....
Good find, Carl....

 

[R.J. MacReady]

I still think there a case to be made with this section of the rule. (below) He does not lose control of the ball till after it hits the ground. It never touches the ground after that.

"If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete"

 

[R.J. MacReady]

He needed the ground to gain control of the ball. That's been a no no for years.

He had 1000% percent control of that ball before he hit the ground.

 

[Cincyfan78]

His right foot hits the ground. He even pushes off with it, kicking up a little turf. It's not like he went from being airborne to landing on his arms. You and I will never agree on this, I guess, but I just don't see how he doesn't have control of that ball prior to it striking the ground.

Doesn't matter because he was still in the act of falling from catching the ball. The rule says that you can't be falling from a catch and make a football move. I've never disagreed he had the ball, or reached out, but the rule clearly says that you can't be falling from catching the ball AND make a football move.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

You got it!

That was a catch and a football move. Once you make the catch and extend the ball to the goal-line, it should be over. He made the catch, extended the ball to the line and scored a TD. after that, it should not matter.

Rule is wrong - fix it!!!!!

Again, how should the rule be changed??? Let's just call everything that looks like a catch a catch!!!

 

[Cincyfan78]

Again, how should the rule be changed??? Let's just call everything that looks like a catch a catch!!!

You really can't change it. The way it is, is the best way.

You have to catch it and maintain possesion all the way through the catch. You can't be considered to make a football move while in the act of falling from making a catch, which is why Bryant's reach towards the goal line doesn't count as a football move.

The only way, as I've said before, to change the rule would be to make it so that as soon as the WR catches the ball, and 2 feet hit the ground, it's a catch.

The problem with that rule would be it would lead to a ton of fumbles as opposed to incomplete passes, as the rule stands now.

 

[jarntt]

This is one rule that I've always disagreed with, haven't most people? It's almost written to cause problems.

I'm torn on whether or not I think the refs made the right call. He pushes off with his leg to propel himself to the goal line and then his forearm hits the ground (down) and then he reaches for the goal line with the ball. This can be viewed as a football move IMO. Even if you want to say time to make a football move is irrelevant because he was going to the ground, when his forearm hits he is down so he has already completed the "process of contacting the ground". So if he actually made a football move, then he obviously had enough time to make a football move as required by the rule. But, past practice says we overturn that every single time, right? And we've all seen it and complained how 'that's a stupid rule' before yesterday.

Usually a football move isn't involved with the actual play when a guy is going to the ground, it's more when he is hit and fumbles and that is what is different here (if you view what Dez did as a Football move). But I think if a WR tries to get two feet down at the sideline that too is a football move. You don't normally tippy toe like that unless you are trying to stay in bounds which is a Football move and the refs have ignored that while calling incomplete pass every time.