Darren Waller fumbled that ball

T-RO

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,824
Reaction score
16,341
Oh **** you ace kissing ref perv.

It is icky, isn't it? But money drives people to do a lot of things.

Creating and posting from multiple accounts with a VPN, going on long deceitful explanations that hide the actual rules. this is some sick stuff.
 

BAT

Mr. Fixit
Messages
19,443
Reaction score
15,607
I already posted a more complete video that has all this and more.

But let's take a look at the rules again and I'll highlight another pertinent part of this rule here in red yet again since you are reading comprehension-deficient.

RULE 8 FORWARD PASS, BACKWARD PASS, FUMBLE
ARTICLE 3. COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is
complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) in the field of play, at the sideline, or in the end zone if a player, who is
inbounds:
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
(c)
after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take
an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

So after Waller gains control AND takes 2 steps, does he then turn up field? No. In his 2 strides, he is moving in the direction of the offense. Per these very clear rules you cannot turn up field as a football move until AFTER you perform parts (a) and (b) of the rule. Again, if you're already moving in the direction of the offense, you are not "turning" in that same direction. So this is where if you're a ref, you look for a 3rd step unless a defender holds him up and then you make the "control of the ball along enough" determination. "Turning upfield" is not meant for receivers already running forward. It is for situations like I said already where a receiver is facing the QB for a catch (like a standstill leap to make a catch) and turns or is moving parallel and is able to take 2 steps and then turns.

LMAO

You only post regarding ref failures and your bias is well known.

I'd love to debate this with you in person and see you take that pompous tone with me.
 

BAT

Mr. Fixit
Messages
19,443
Reaction score
15,607
Marcus will defend the refs 99% of the time. In fact he spends more time on this forum defending the refs than posting about anything else.

Tells me everything I need to know about him and his posts.

99% of the time is giving him way too much credit.

He is as biased towards the refs as they come.
 

BigWillie

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,355
Reaction score
1,081
Just found video of the slo mo replay and the ball is out before the 3rd foot comes down. It's not a catch and correctly called incomplete. At 0:53 below.



A third step is not a must in the completion of a catch.

From the rulebook ..

ARTICLE 3. COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) in the field of play, at the sideline, or in the end zone if a player, who is inbounds: (a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and (b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and (c) after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs ANY act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

The 'additional step' as in the rule is one of the acts common to the game, but not a necessity as stated here. Tucking the ball away, extending the ball forward, turning upfield or avoiding an opponent are also considered just as important as the additional step in determining whether a catch was made.

Denote the underlined in the rule, and the important of ANY act common to the game, and the examples cited. Multiple are cited, not just an additional step. Meaning only one needs to be completed to complete the catch.

But going back to your stated part in the video -- football tucked (went from left part of body to right part of body to secure football), and turning body to run upfield both happened. As stated in the rulebook, both would apply as an act common to the game and make the pass complete.
 

T-RO

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,824
Reaction score
16,341
Here it is in a nutshell. If anyone thinks this is "tinfoil" they are ignorant or they are a side player in the game.

The NFL is a league of billionaire owners.

Are billionaires ever satisfied with good profits? Of course not. They want to *sponge* every single nickle and dime they can. There's that. And in a club of 32 billionaires you have favors that must be paid...to one another and to those of higher power.

Since inception, the league always favored big market versus small market teams, always had gambling surrounding the sport, always had occasions they pushed their agenda on to the game. Now? With the explosion of gambling and NFL's explicit partnerships...and the general corruption of society...It's 10 times worse.
 
Last edited:

Doomsday

Rising Star
Messages
19,770
Reaction score
16,013
He took 2 steps, started to tuck it away and turned up the field. Not sure how or what is a catch these days.

Seems to be at the whim of the league

FFGZ7p8XMAQBs-w
 

T-RO

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,824
Reaction score
16,341
Seems to be at the whim of the league

Just like they want it.

In study of corrupt entities one sees they repeatedly use these tactics:
-repression of known facts
-deliberately confusing, even contradictory language (words or clauses that don't mean what most people think, often the opposite meaning!)
-paid agents, advocates and bots
-enough money or power to suppress widespread scrutiny, and to validate their authority / "legitimacy"​
 

Brax

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,355
Reaction score
6,989
Yep, he took 2 full steps and started to take a 3rd as he was tucking the ball under his arm and lost it.

FYI, we couldn't challenge it because NY called down to say they reviewed it and it wasn't a catch. Complete nonsense that they are randomly chiming in without any challenge and we aren't aware of it.
link for this.
 

MarcusRock

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,841
Reaction score
16,028
LMAO

You only post regarding ref failures and your bias is well known.

I'd love to debate this with you in person and see you take that pompous tone with me.

When posting the actual rules drives people to getting mad, you know you've painted someone in a corner they can't maneuver from. Your tinfoil boy there lied after being confronted with his own set of rules he posted while accusing me of making stuff up. But your internet toughness notwithstanding, how was this a fumble per the rules?
 

nightrain

Since 1971
Messages
14,503
Reaction score
24,338
The Refs would not have overturned that call on challenge. That Officiating Crew should be disciplined and retrained for making the game about them. It is completely ridiculous for a game to take that long over ticky-tac penalty calls.
 

CWR

Well-Known Member
Messages
23,422
Reaction score
34,125
Yep, he took 2 full steps and started to take a 3rd as he was tucking the ball under his arm and lost it.

FYI, we couldn't challenge it because NY called down to say they reviewed it and it wasn't a catch. Complete nonsense that they are randomly chiming in without any challenge and we aren't aware of it.

$$$
 

heir

Well-Known Member
Messages
527
Reaction score
545
Yep, he took 2 full steps and started to take a 3rd as he was tucking the ball under his arm and lost it.

FYI, we couldn't challenge it because NY called down to say they reviewed it and it wasn't a catch. Complete nonsense that they are randomly chiming in without any challenge and we aren't aware of it.
New York didn't chime in. The refs huddle and called it an incomplete catch. Which is still so stupid.

Call it a fumble on the field and it gets reviewed automatically, but instead, they ruled it incomplete forcing a team to review. makes no sense.
 

MarcusRock

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,841
Reaction score
16,028
A third step is not a must in the completion of a catch.

From the rulebook ..



The 'additional step' as in the rule is one of the acts common to the game, but not a necessity as stated here. Tucking the ball away, extending the ball forward, turning upfield or avoiding an opponent are also considered just as important as the additional step in determining whether a catch was made.

Denote the underlined in the rule, and the important of ANY act common to the game, and the examples cited. Multiple are cited, not just an additional step. Meaning only one needs to be completed to complete the catch.

But going back to your stated part in the video -- football tucked (went from left part of body to right part of body to secure football), and turning body to run upfield both happened. As stated in the rulebook, both would apply as an act common to the game and make the pass complete.

I know a 3rd step isn't the only thing required but it's pertinent because none of the other things happened. The ball was not tucked away in any way, shape or form. He might have intended to tuck it in his right arm but the ball was away from his body which is how Kearse punched it out. Tucked means held into his body. That didn't happen. Again, none of the football moves mentioned (or not mentioned) can happen until AFTER parts (a) and (b) are completed. I posted these rules already but read the ones you posted. Waller is already running up field by the time he gets 2 feet on the ground so he can't turn upfield when he is already running upfield. These examples are listed for every kind of scenario that happens during a catch. "Turning upfield" is for when a player might have his back towards upfield, makes a catch while facing the QB, either at a standstill or leaping and landing, then turns to go in the direction of the offense, for example. Taking a 3rd step is designed for when a player is already running upfield, like when Gallup catches a sideline route, for example. There's nothing to "turn" to because he already is. Again, it has to happen after control and 2 feet down, not as control or 2 feet down are happening.

 

MarcusRock

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,841
Reaction score
16,028



im sure we will now hear about how some posters know more than Terry though.


Appeal to authority all you want when convenient but does Terry know that the Replay Official CAN chime in and review a play where a turnover is in question like it was here?

ARTICLE 2. REPLAY OFFICIAL REQUEST FOR REVIEW. Only the Replay Official or the Senior Vice President of Officiating
or his or her designee may initiate a review of a play:
(a) that begins after the two-minute warning of each half;
(b) throughout any overtime period;
(c) when points are scored by either team;
(d) that is a Try attempt (successful or unsuccessful); and
(e)
when on-field officials rule:
(1) an interception by an opponent;
(2)
a fumble or backward pass recovered by an opponent or that goes out of bounds through the opponent’s end zone;
(3) a scrimmage kick touched by the receiving team and recovered by the kicking team; or
(4) a disqualification of a player.
Such plays may be reviewed regardless of whether a foul is committed on the play that, if accepted, would negate the on-field
ruling.
The Replay Official may only challenge a play until the next legal snap or kick. The Replay Official may consult with a
designated member of the Officiating department at the league office regarding whether to challenge a play.

So tell me, am I right here or is Terry?
 

HungryLion

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,533
Reaction score
60,409
Appeal to authority all you want when convenient but does Terry know that the Replay Official CAN chime in and review a play where a turnover is in question like it was here?

ARTICLE 2. REPLAY OFFICIAL REQUEST FOR REVIEW. Only the Replay Official or the Senior Vice President of Officiating
or his or her designee may initiate a review of a play:
(a) that begins after the two-minute warning of each half;
(b) throughout any overtime period;
(c) when points are scored by either team;
(d) that is a Try attempt (successful or unsuccessful); and
(e) when on-field officials rule:

(1) an interception by an opponent;
(2)
a fumble or backward pass recovered by an opponent or that goes out of bounds through the opponent’s end zone;
(3) a scrimmage kick touched by the receiving team and recovered by the kicking team; or
(4) a disqualification of a player.
Such plays may be reviewed regardless of whether a foul is committed on the play that, if accepted, would negate the on-field
ruling.
The Replay Official may only challenge a play until the next legal snap or kick. The Replay Official may consult with a
designated member of the Officiating department at the league office regarding whether to challenge a play.
So tell me, am I right here or is Terry?



LOL of course you chime in white knighting for the officials again. Gross.


I will appeal to Terry in this one though. Thanks boss.


They suck at their jobs. Why can’t you just come out and say it instead of defending their ineptitude all the time.
 

HungryLion

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,533
Reaction score
60,409
Appeal to authority all you want when convenient but does Terry know that the Replay Official CAN chime in and review a play where a turnover is in question like it was here?

ARTICLE 2. REPLAY OFFICIAL REQUEST FOR REVIEW. Only the Replay Official or the Senior Vice President of Officiating
or his or her designee may initiate a review of a play:
(a) that begins after the two-minute warning of each half;
(b) throughout any overtime period;
(c) when points are scored by either team;
(d) that is a Try attempt (successful or unsuccessful); and
(e)
when on-field officials rule:
(1) an interception by an opponent;
(2)
a fumble or backward pass recovered by an opponent or that goes out of bounds through the opponent’s end zone;
(3) a scrimmage kick touched by the receiving team and recovered by the kicking team; or
(4) a disqualification of a player.
Such plays may be reviewed regardless of whether a foul is committed on the play that, if accepted, would negate the on-field
ruling.
The Replay Official may only challenge a play until the next legal snap or kick. The Replay Official may consult with a
designated member of the Officiating department at the league office regarding whether to challenge a play.
So tell me, am I right here or is Terry?


By the way. The play didn’t go to review. The refs just changed the ruling on the field. No review was initiated like can happen on turnovers.

everyone knows the refs can intimate a review and actually go to the hood and review the play. That’s not what happened here and that’s not what Terry is talking about.


Terry is talking about the official in the booth helping overturn a not clear and obvious call on the field. Not talking about whether the refs should have done an official review which is allowed on all turnovers.

So perhaps you should read your own post again.
 

MarcusRock

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,841
Reaction score
16,028
LOL of course you chime in white knighting for the officials again. Gross.


I will appeal to Terry in this one though. Thanks boss.


They suck at their jobs. Why can’t you just come out and say it instead of defending their ineptitude all the time.

Answer the question. I just posted the rule that shows when Replay Officials can chime in. We know they can when there's a scoring play and within the 2 minute warnings which are listed here. What else is listed here? A fumble, right? So is Terry right or can the Replay Official indeed chime in on a turnover called?

Once again, a poster gets up in arms after quoting a Tweet, not the actual rules.
 

MarcusRock

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,841
Reaction score
16,028
By the way. The play didn’t go to review. The refs just changed the ruling on the field. No review was initiated like can happen on turnovers.

everyone knows the refs can intimate a review and actually go to the hood and review the play. That’s not what happened here and that’s not what Terry is talking about.

So perhaps you should read your own post again.

Do refs "go under the hood" to review scoring plays? Not unless it's super close, right? If they can see it clearly they don't take all that time, do they? But yet they review them all.
 

HungryLion

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,533
Reaction score
60,409
Answer the question. I just posted the rule that shows when Replay Officials can chime in. We know they can when there's a scoring play and within the 2 minute warnings which are listed here. What else is listed here? A fumble, right? So is Terry right or can the Replay Official indeed chime in on a turnover called?

Once again, a poster gets up in arms after quoting a Tweet, not the actual rules.


I just did answer the question.

the booth official can’t just chime in and overturn the call on the field unless it’s clear and obvious.


In that situation it’s supposed to go to review. BUT THEY DIDNT GO TO REVIEW. They just changed the call instead.


so your rules you posted don’t even apply here.
 
Top