1. Welcome to San Diego Chargers NFL Football Podcast and Forum!

    Bolt Talk is one of the largest online communities for the San Diego Chargers. We host a regular Chargers podcast during the season. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Still-fuming Lions fans grill Goodell on 'Calvin Johnson rule'

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by ThunderHorse17, May 20, 2011.

  1. ThunderHorse17

    ThunderHorse17 Lone Wolf

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,327
    Ratings:
    +341
    NFL.com news: Lions fans question 'Calvin Johnson rule' in chat with Goodell

    WTF get over it. Yea I wasnt even fully satisfied when SD beat Den in the last game of the 08 season to make the postseason. That Hoculi-Bowl can never be given back. It irks me every time I see a individual players stats vs DEN on a gamescreen and have to be reminded that the Records show that PR has NOT in fact never lost to Den.

    This rule about posesion to the ground is valid. All CJ had to do was tuck the ball in and finish the act of catching it and roll over on the ground. Guess hes too good to dirty his jersey even on a TD scoring/game winning play. There is always next time.
     
  2. wrbanwal

    wrbanwal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    9,707
    Ratings:
    +1,036

    if they called it consistently. that call was total bs. he caught the ball, dropped on his fat a s s with both feet down.

    i do agree fans need to get over this stuff. it happens often
     
  3. ThunderHorse17

    ThunderHorse17 Lone Wolf

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,327
    Ratings:
    +341
    Well it seems to be one of those things that on this particular play that the textbook definition at the time for maintaining a catch to the ground, was pretty acturately called.

    What it really seems is the problem with the rule for catching the ball *anywhere on the field* is this that its harder to actualy finish the play. Where as rushing the ball its alot more about where did they finaly finish the play. It sucks that rushing for a TD and just making the football break the plane makes a instant TD and ZERO chance to fumble or be overruled like a pass that say wasnt fully caught. If we need to I guess we can make a rule that says a catch in the endzone ONLY has to be caught not maintained to the ground and wtf who needs feet on the ground if a RB can just poke the ball over the plane and its a dead play.

    I can see where the fans are pissed, but seems that the pissed-ness is in the wrong direction. The rule is perfect. Not like some other New rules like the Tuck. Or while were talkin BS NFL the whole *oops i blew the whistle and I know you should get the ball but you wont* still F hoculii.

    Also if a receiver catches a ball in the middle of the field while diving for it, and the replay shows that he caught it but as he was rolling over to keep it from touching the ground OOPS it does. That is what you call a incomplete pass. It is the same in the endzone.
     
  4. Joy Division

    Joy Division Slightly-known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,323
    Ratings:
    +542
    Really, the rules are about POSESSION. So, when a running back has the ball, he has POSESSION. Breakin the plane is a TD. If you are catching the ball in the EZ, you must have POSSESION. The receiver hasn't been running with POSESSION, so the receiver must show that the catch is a continuous catch. I agree actuall...kinda simple.
     
  5. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,208
    Ratings:
    +2,420
    Charger fans shouldn't be telling anyone to get over anything after all the bitching we did over Hochuli-gate.

    And I say "we" because I was just as guilty.
     
  6. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,208
    Ratings:
    +2,420
    If you don't overly nitpick the play with a fine tooth comb judging it off technicalities and just watch it you can tell he's clearly controlling the ball.
     
  7. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,300
    Ratings:
    +4,411
    Until he isn't. ;)
     
  8. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,208
    Ratings:
    +2,420


    He's clearly controlling the ball all the way. It's not bobbling or anything. But because he grazes the grass at the end of his motion and suddenly that's not "controlling"?

    Like I said, nitpicking with technicalities. Anyone who watches that without analyzing it to an atomic level* can tell he clearly has full control of the ball.

    * - obvious sarcasm alert.
     
  9. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,300
    Ratings:
    +4,411
    So what happened to controlling it all the way to the ground?
     
  10. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,208
    Ratings:
    +2,420
    What happened to obvious catches being ruled a catch?

    From my vantage point he was controlling the ball all the way to the ground but because he went to the ground it wasn't a catch. :icon_huh:
     
  11. Joy Division

    Joy Division Slightly-known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,323
    Ratings:
    +542
    The Calvin Johnson Play would still be ruled incomplete had it been on any other part of the playing field. Ball hits ground and comes out...he didnt run with it..he was coming down with it. It came out when it hit the ground. No possession. No catch. Am I missing something?
     
  12. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,300
    Ratings:
    +4,411
    We've seen it many times with the Chargers........ McCardell catches the ball with both feet down on the sideline, but after he lands out of bounds, the ball moves in his grasp........ ruled not a catch.

    I don't see those type of plays any different than the Johnson non-TD play. The NFL has decided that the receiver has to control the ball all the way to the ground. You may not like the rule (which I can fully understand), but that's the way the rule is written.
     
  13. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,105
    Ratings:
    +3,556
    Yes. He had full possession all the way through the act of catching the ball. He lost it when he stood up.
     
  14. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,300
    Ratings:
    +4,411
    No, he lost it when he put his hand down...... his knee was still on the ground, he hadn't started back up yet. The real question is why was he holding the ball out like that when he went down? He should've tucked the ball away, and then the whole thing would be moot.

    Just because you have big hands, doesn't mean you should be hanging the ball out like that...... dumb on his part.
     
  15. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    My problem with the rule is that there is 2 different sets of rules between someone who catches the ball in the end zone and goes to the ground, and someone runs into the endzone and falls to to the ground.

    I just think it is ridiculous that someone can dive into the endzone, and the moment the ball crosses the goal line, it is a TD and he doesn't have to maintain possession, yet the rules are different if the guy is already in the endzone. I don't care which way the rule goes, but I do think it should be universal no matter if you are in the endzone or diving for the endzone. If you have possession in the endzone, it should be a TD.
     
  16. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    Totally agree. We had 2 opprotunities to score after the bad call, and we failed. That loss was on the failure of the offense, not a bad call
     
  17. SDRaiderH8er

    SDRaiderH8er Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    11,638
    Ratings:
    +2,074
    Its all about possession. One the person is running into the end zone , so he has already maintained possession. The receiver is in the end zone and is trying to get possession.
     
  18. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,208
    Ratings:
    +2,420
    It was both, as well as a failure of the defense who should have stopped the 2 pt conversion.

    You can't take complete blame away from the bad call. The irrefutable fact remains we would have won if that call was called correctly. The fact that the Chargers could have saved the game despite that and still failed only makes it worse.
     
  19. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,208
    Ratings:
    +2,420
    The problem comes in when we try to nitpick what constitutes "possession".

    Calvin is clearly in full control of the ball as he's coming down but the NFL doesn't want to define it as "possession" because he grazes the grass with the ball while he's controlling it.

    I don't see why it can't be ruled a catch so long as he puts 2 feet down (which he did) and demonstrates full control (which he did).

    But this is what I mean when I say we're nitpicking the play for technicalities. Generally speaking if a WR goes for the ball and it hits the ground near the end of his motion it's because he's not in control of the ball...therefore not a catch. If you watch the play in question Calvin is clearly in control of the ball. The ball goes on the ground because of where he put it, not because it landed there while he was bobbling it.
     
  20. ThunderHorse17

    ThunderHorse17 Lone Wolf

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,327
    Ratings:
    +341
    Seems pretty simple to me, the play would have been a CLEAR TD had he tucked in the ball rather than brace himself and save falling down. The rule is right the call was right. CJs actions werent fundamental football. He should have tucked and rolled like the rest of the NFL receivers.... Hes clearly too good to wear a dirty uniform.
     
  21. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,208
    Ratings:
    +2,420
    It's pretty clear why they over-turned it and I don't think anyone is arguing that.

    It's also pretty clear why the infamous tuck rule was called the way it was because that was also the "right" call.

    This isn't a case of people complaining that the rule was interpreted wrong. It's a case of people complaining that the rule is flawed because, despite the technicalities, it's obvious that it was the other way.

    Yeah, Brady was technically still "tucking" the ball and therefore it was still technically a "forward pass" but it was obvious to anyone watching that he was no longer passing the ball and it should have been a fumble if not for a technicality.

    Back to the topic at hand, sure it's technically not "control" because he brought the ball to the ground but if you don't nitpick with technicalities and just watch the play you can clearly see he has full control of the ball.
     
  22. ThunderHorse17

    ThunderHorse17 Lone Wolf

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,327
    Ratings:
    +341
    I dont think the rule is broken. You MUST maintain the catch through falling to the ground if your not able to catch it cleanly.
     
  23. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,208
    Ratings:
    +2,420
    He took two steps and had clear control.

    Anything more than that is nitpicking.
     
  24. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,300
    Ratings:
    +4,411
    [​IMG]
     
  25. SDRaiderH8er

    SDRaiderH8er Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    11,638
    Ratings:
    +2,074
    possession is defined in the rule book. And I am not a Football official, so I am not able to give you an educated response. We as fans can only rely on what we are told by the Official’s on the field.

    And if we have to rely on the Officials call, 50% of the people are not going to like the call.
     

Share This Page