Lamb’s feet were in on the touchdown

[MarcusRock]

Again, read the tread and get familiar with the discussion. I have made it clear the foot was dragging and never even implied it came straight down.

I use the still because it shows that it is obvious his toes were down in the endzone well before the heel even got to the OB line. The toes had to drag for the heel to even get to the OB line.

I think you are the only person who believes CeeDee's toes did not come down in bounds at all. Or maybe you think the toes and heel came down at the same time, but they didn't.

Except you can't see a foot dragging using a still. You HAVE to use video and the video shows that the backward momentum had the full ball of his foot come down further back than your tippy toe still shows. So you are ASSUMING a drag based on a straight down step, not a foot landing down while moving backwards which can ONLY be seen via video. So to make your case you have to ignore the video but officials use video so that's "official" as it were.

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

But I'm guessing it's similar to if you catch a pass and your heal hits in bounds first, but your toes are out, it's incomplete.

Well, the rule MarcusRock cited basically says that...

PASSING PLAYS
A.R. 15.104 Heel/toe
Third-and-10 on A30. A2 controls a pass and gets his left foot down in bounds at the 50. As his right foot comes down, the heel
hits in bounds and in the normal motion of taking a step, his toes hit out of bounds. Officials rule complete.
Ruling: Reviewable. A’s ball fourth-and-10 on A30. Incomplete. Adjust clock if wound before review. If any part of the foot hits out
of bounds during the normal process of taking a step (no drag or delay), then the foot is out of bounds.

I highlighted what seems to be the relevant part, however it says if there is no foot drag, and there was foot drag in this case with CeeDee. Also says in the normal process of taking a step and CeeDee was not taking a normal step.

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

that's "official" as it were.

You're arguing the ruling even though I've said time and time again it's not the ruling it's the rule. The rest of you post is just your opinion. I have mine and it differs. It seems clear to me from this slo-mo CeeDee drug his foot. It's quick and only an inch or so, but that doesn't matter, all that should matter is the toe came down in bounds and since the foot drug it should count.

 

[aikemirv]

You're arguing the ruling even though I've said time and time again it's not the ruling it's the rule. The rest of you post is just your opinion. I have mine and it differs. It seems clear to me from this slo-mo CeeDee drug his foot. It's quick and only an inch or so, but that doesn't matter, all that should matter is the toe came down in bounds and since the foot drug it should count.

That is in no way a drag-your blind or disengenuous

 

[MarcusRock]

You're arguing the ruling even though I've said time and time again it's not the ruling it's the rule. The rest of you post is just your opinion. I have mine and it differs. It seems clear to me from this slo-mo CeeDee drug his foot. It's quick and only an inch or so, but that doesn't matter, all that should matter is the toe came down in bounds and since the foot drug it should count.

No, I'm arguing about what happened per the video. You're talking about a drag you assumed happened by your still. Now you're saying it was a "quick" 1-inch drag and that this "should" count as one but everyone knows what a real toe drag is, and this ain't it, if it is at all.

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

That is in no way a drag-your blind or disengenuous

It's my opinion it was a quick drag and I can state my opinion without insulting you. Either way, toes were down in bounds and it should be a catch, bad rule.

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

You're talking about a drag you assumed happened by your still.

And you assume it didn't drag, so we'll just agree to disagree.

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

To anyone who doesn't think his toes drug, go to the twitter page here by clicking on the tweet, in the bottom corner you'll see two arrows, click on the arrows and you get a high def full screen view. You clearly see the toes come down and drag, kicking up a cloud of the rubberized balls in the turf.

 

[jsb357]

It is the worst rule in all of sports....

Sorry.

 

[VACowboy]

It's similar because both did toe drags to the OB line. The difference is CeeDee's heel came down OB after the toe drag to the line. That should still count as foot IB. If his heel had came down OB at the same time the toes were IB, yes, it's not a catch, but that's not what happened.

These two plays are nothing alike. Smith's heel did not hit the ground. Ceedee's did. Ceedee did not "toe drag to the line." His toe hit first and the rest of his foot followed until his heel hit the turf--out of bounds. By rule, NOT A CATCH. You may not like the rule but the call was correct.

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

You may not like the rule but the call was correct.

Read the thread before commenting please. I'm saying it's a bad rule, not arguing about the ruling. You think I'm arguing against the ruling instead of the rule itself so do not understand what my point was. If a toe down is good enough falling forward, it should be good enough falling backwards.

 

[VACowboy]

To anyone who doesn't think his toes drug, go to the twitter page here by clicking on the tweet, in the bottom corner you'll see two arrows, click on the arrows and you get a high def full screen view. You clearly see the toes come down and drag, kicking up a cloud of the rubberized balls in the turf.

So his toe dragged. His his heel hit out of bounds, not his toe. No catch.

 

[5Stars]

He got both feet in. Was he robbed?

Fake news...done read that.

 

[jsb357]

Is this a bad time to ask folks if they thought Dez caught it?

he did'nt

 

[VACowboy]

Read the thread before commenting please. I'm saying it's a bad rule, not arguing about the ruling. You think I'm arguing against the ruling instead of the rule itself so do not understand what my point was. If a toe down is good enough falling forward, it should be good enough falling backwards.

I responded twice to your opinion about the badness of the rule and you chose to ignore both. Instead you said...

It's similar because both did toe drags to the OB line. The difference is CeeDee's heel came down OB after the toe drag to the line. That should still count as foot IB. If his heel had came down OB at the same time the toes were IB, yes, it's not a catch, but that's not what happened.

And I responded to that. Please don't lecture me on posting etiquette.

PS: Maybe it's a bad rule. Maybe it's not. Whichever, it's been the same rule for a long time. It's not a subjective call. You're either in out and it's reviewable, and it works the same for everybody. In the grand scheme this seems like maybe the very smallest of the rules we should be screaming about, but to each his own-

 

[Ken]

Ok.

Make it make sense then.

 

[mahoneybill]

When you toe tap on the sideline it’s a catch. Your heels eventually hit out of bounds without touching in bounds. Why would it be different in this situation

unless every toe touch catch that’s been ruled a catch should have been ruled out of bounds. It should be the same either way. Either two sets of twos equal two feet or both toes and heels need to be in bounds for a catch. Can’t have it both ways

bingo. I commented the same way in another post

 

[stilltheguru]

Nfl rules are so dumb. It was obviously a td but whatever

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

So his toe dragged. His his heel hit out of bounds, not his toe. No catch.

So if this is the rule they used...

PASSING PLAYS
A.R. 15.104 Heel/toe
Third-and-10 on A30. A2 controls a pass and gets his left foot down in bounds at the 50. As his right foot comes down, the heel
hits in bounds and in the normal motion of taking a step, his toes hit out of bounds. Officials rule complete.
Ruling: Reviewable. A’s ball fourth-and-10 on A30. Incomplete. Adjust clock if wound before review. If any part of the foot hits out
of bounds during the normal process of taking a step (no drag or delay), then the foot is out of bounds.

it's a good catch because his toes drug.

 

[Runwildboys]

The rule baffles me. So had Lamb just dragged his toe out of bounds it's a TD?

That was still one hell of a play by Lamb.

Yes, if his heel hasn't come down untill after he dragged his toes out, it would have been a TD.