The Overturned Touchdown

[JayDaRavensFan]

It shoulda been a td, its a dumb rule. We're just lucky to have been on the winning side of it.

[PeRK82]

I was about 20 yds from the play , at first glace , thought it was a TD. But hey , im not complaining, rules are rules. Finally we get one thats in our favor.

That game was crazy, i honestly thought we were going into overtime. Lost my voice by half time, as soon as i got it back, i ended up losing it again and again. I couldn't make any noise by the end of the game. I was just Banging on the chair infront of me as hard and as fast as i could.

This was a must win game, just like this upcoming 49ers game. From here on out, its like a play off game, because i dont think the Stealers are going to lose the rest of the season. They have a cake walk, the only game i can see them possibly losing is against the 49ERS, good thing its in S.F. Hope Harbs, gives his brother Jim some pointers against the Stealers.

I mean we can lose but then that means we are going to be a wild card again. Kinda sick of being a wild card and no Home field advantage because it does make a diff. If we win the rest of the season, we will have the number 1 seed, a bye and only have to win 2 games and we are in the S.B, sounds easy enough. LOL

[Ravensstrike4424]

its easier to call most of you not smart,by rule it wasnt a touchdown

[mrwideout]

It was not a bad call. It was the correct call.

According to the rules it was not a catch. If it was not a catch, then it can`t be a touchdown either.

Why do everybody have such a big problem with this rule? If this catch happens anywhere else on the field, it`s incomplete and nobody complains about it. Because it happens in the endzone, that is different how? It`s not.

The competition commitee had a chance to change this rule this off-season, but did not. And they shouldn`t. That would only create more problems. If these boneheaded reicevers understood the rules, they would make sure they maintained possesion of the ball, and not jam the ball into the ground before they have completed the catch.

[mrwideout]

[quote name='arnie_uk' timestamp='1321904622' post='880508']
he did have possession before he hit the ground, but when he hit the ground it knocked it lose if that happened just on the one yard line and his outstrectched arm which he used to cushion his fall crossed the goaline its a TD, but becuase it happened in the EZ, its not? do you see my point? if it happens outside EZ, but the ball crosses the plane then when he falls it gets knocked loose, its already a TD cause the ball crossed the plane, doesnt matter if he controls possession all the way through the catch, its one rule for inside the EZ and another for the ball crossing the plane... stupid rule, but correct call becuase of the rule, well actually maybe its a good a rule, and the "crossing the plane" rule is the stupid one?
[/quote]


It`s not a different rule. It`s the same rule. He was going to the ground. He must maintain possesion of the ball. If the ball hits the ground it can not move. The ball hit the ground and it moved.

[berad]

[quote name='mrwideout' timestamp='1321913420' post='880698']
It`s not a different rule. It`s the same rule. He was going to the ground. He must maintain possesion of the ball. If the ball hits the ground it can not move. The ball hit the ground and it moved.
[/quote]

If you're going to try to palm the ball, while trying to make a catch, you'd better make sure it doesn't come out of your hand.

[arnie_uk]

[quote name='mrwideout' timestamp='1321913420' post='880698']


It`s not a different rule. It`s the same rule. He was going to the ground. He must maintain possesion of the ball. If the ball hits the ground it can not move. The ball hit the ground and it moved.
[/quote]
i dont think you understand what im saying, i agree with the call, by the letter of the law its a drop, but if he caught it at the one yard, the stretched his hand out and the ball broke the plane, before he drops the ball when he hits the ground, it would have been a TD, (see 49ers first TD pass on sunday) so because he caught it in the endzone and is already past the plane he doesnt get a TD

I know in openfield its a drop, no arguement, im just saying that if he caught it outside the endzone and broke the plane with the ball on his way down, it doesnt matter if he drops the ball when he hits the ground or not in that sitaution because he had control initially and breaks the plane so its a TD, but because hes already in the EZ its not a TD, i dont think its fair the 49ers TD stood and benagls didnt when the both had initial control and then both dropped it when their hand hit the ground, only difference is 49ers caught it outside EZ and broke the plane, whereas gresham caught it inside the EZ...

If gresham caught the pass initally and not juggled it (at the 1/2 yrd line) then crossed the plane and dropped it as he fell, like he did, it wouldnt have been over turned cause he crossed the plane. hes getting penalised for catching it in the EZ.. thats my issue with these two rules

[mrwideout]

[quote name='arnie_uk' timestamp='1321915879' post='880744']
i dont think you understand what im saying, i agree with the call, by the letter of the law its a drop, but if he caught it at the one yard, the stretched his hand out and the ball broke the plane, before he drops the ball when he hits the ground, it would have been a TD, (see 49ers first TD pass on sunday) so because he caught it in the endzone and is already past the plane he doesnt get a TD

I know in openfield its a drop, no arguement, im just saying that if he caught it outside the endzone and broke the plane with the ball on his way down, it doesnt matter if he drops the ball when he hits the ground or not in that sitaution because he had control initially and breaks the plane so its a TD, but because hes already in the EZ its not a TD, i dont think its fair the 49ers TD stood and benagls didnt when the both had initial control and then both dropped it when their hand hit the ground, only difference is 49ers caught it outside EZ and broke the plane, whereas gresham caught it inside the EZ...

If gresham caught the pass initally and not juggled it (at the 1/2 yrd line) then crossed the plane and dropped it as he fell, like he did, it wouldnt have been over turned cause he crossed the plane. hes getting penalised for catching it in the EZ.. thats my issue with these two rules
[/quote]

Didn`t see the 49ers game. But if he was going to the ground and lost possesion of the ball. It shouldn`t matter if he was breaking the plain or not, because it`s an incomplete pass. Incomplete passes can`t be touchdowns.

[Death_from_Above]

[quote name='K-Dog' timestamp='1321831281' post='879130']
I am the only one willing to admit that it was indeed a touch down and it was a bad call ?
[/quote]
Per the rules it was not a touchdown as he did not maintain possession all the way to the ground.

While the rule bailed us out, I personally do not like the rule. IMO, it places a higher burden on a receiver versus a runner. How many times have we seen a runner dive to break the plane and lose control of the ball as they simultaneously break the plane and land on the ground with the ball extended in one hand? Per the rules, as soon as a runner breaks the plane with the ball the play is over resulting in a touchdown.

If we look at the amazing catch by the Cincy receiver, he establishes possession in the end zone. If he has possession in the end zone, has he not also broken the plane? When it comes to a receiver, possession in the end zone, i.e. the plane is broken, is not good enough. The receiver has to maintain possession all the way to the ground. Oddly enough, there's also a rule that says the ground can't cause a fumble, but apparently the ground can play defense and knock the ball out of the receiver's hand and cause an incomplete pass.

In the end, I think it's a bad rule that ended up bailing us out.

[Tank 92]

[quote name='arnie_uk' timestamp='1321915879' post='880744']
i dont think you understand what im saying, i agree with the call, by the letter of the law its a drop, but if he caught it at the one yard, the stretched his hand out and the ball broke the plane, before he drops the ball when he hits the ground, it would have been a TD, (see 49ers first TD pass on sunday) so because he caught it in the endzone and is already past the plane he doesnt get a TD

I know in openfield its a drop, no arguement, im just saying that if he caught it outside the endzone and broke the plane with the ball on his way down, it doesnt matter if he drops the ball when he hits the ground or not in that sitaution because he had control initially and breaks the plane so its a TD, but because hes already in the EZ its not a TD, i dont think its fair the 49ers TD stood and benagls didnt when the both had initial control and then both dropped it when their hand hit the ground, only difference is 49ers caught it outside EZ and broke the plane, whereas gresham caught it inside the EZ...

If gresham caught the pass initally and not juggled it (at the 1/2 yrd line) then crossed the plane and dropped it as he fell, like he did, it wouldnt have been over turned cause he crossed the plane. hes getting penalised for catching it in the EZ.. thats my issue with these two rules
[/quote]


I understand your point and I didn't see the niners play you speak of. It sounds like the guy gained possession of the ball and "made a football move", stepping and extending the ball across the plane. If that is correct, it was already a catch when it crossed the plane. TD, play over.

On the other hand, Gresham was juggling and tiptoeing, never really making a "football move" after trying to secure the ball. Why he used the ball to break his fall is a mystery. Tuck the ball and roll, TD.

[funky141]

[quote name='awholelottahaloti' timestamp='1321920338' post='880821']


I understand your point and I didn't see the niners play you speak of. It sounds like the guy gained possession of the ball and "made a football move", stepping and extending the ball across the plane. If that is correct, it was already a catch when it crossed the plane. TD, play over.

On the other hand, Gresham was juggling and tiptoeing, never really making a "football move" after trying to secure the ball. Why he used the ball to break his fall is a mystery. Tuck the ball and roll, TD.
[/quote]
Incorrect, a "football move" in the NFL is after controling the ball or catching it, then two steps is considered a "football move".
Gresham clearly made 2 steps after taking control of the ball, broke the plain thus it should have been a TD
I could care less if it was a TD or not but this is the dumbest NFL rule ever.

Ask your self whats the difference if a RB dives over the pile lands in the endzone and drops the ball?
Gresham basically did the same thing

[EnVy_CaLiBeR]

Don't know if it's been posted but the NFL announced that the correct call was made in that game. Just saw it on ESPN.

[JohnJohnson]

[quote name='funky141' timestamp='1321921680' post='880842']
Incorrect, a "football move" in the NFL is after controling the ball or catching it, then two steps is considered a "football move".
Gresham clearly made 2 steps after taking control of the ball, broke the plain thus it should have been a TD
I could care less if it was a TD or not but this is the dumbest NFL rule ever.

Ask your self whats the difference if a RB dives over the pile lands in the endzone and drops the ball?
Gresham basically did the same thing
[/quote]

Once again, no it is not the same thing as a RB breaking the plane. Gresham bobbled the ball, and therefore he never established possession outside of the end zone. He controlled the ball with his hands outside of the end zone, and one foot came down outside of the end zone, but his second foot came down inside of the end zone. Therefore, he established possession inside of the end zone. Breaking the plane did not apply to this situation, he had to keep possession throughout the process of going to the ground because he established possession inside of the end zone.

[JohnJohnson]

[quote name='EnVy_CaLiBeR' timestamp='1321922275' post='880852']
Don't know if it's been posted but the NFL announced that the correct call was made in that game. Just saw it on ESPN.
[/quote]

It was the correct call; any complaints should be directed at the rule, not the refs.

[ravensdfan]

I like how the earlier play is getting ignored in all this. If you want Gresham's TD to stand, then to be fair, Cincy NEVER gets the chance to make that throw. Why? Because if Gresham's TD stands, then the play where they ruled an incomplete pass becomes a complete pass and a fumble, recovered by the Ravens. So Cincy does not even have possession in order to make that potential TD throw. End of story.

[berad]

[quote name='ravensdfan' timestamp='1321924899' post='880898']
I like how the earlier play is getting ignored in all this. If you want Gresham's TD to stand, then to be fair, Cincy NEVER gets the chance to make that throw. Why? Because if Gresham's TD stands, then the play where they ruled an incomplete pass becomes a complete pass and a fumble, recovered by the Ravens. So Cincy does not even have possession in order to make that potential TD throw. End of story.
[/quote]

Yerp. Good point. If that was an incompletion, the other one was as well.

[Tank 92]

[quote name='funky141' timestamp='1321921680' post='880842']
Incorrect, a "football move" in the NFL is after controling the ball or catching it, then two steps is considered a "football move".
Gresham clearly made 2 steps after taking control of the ball, broke the plain thus it should have been a TD
I could care less if it was a TD or not but this is the dumbest NFL rule ever.

Ask your self whats the difference if a RB dives over the pile lands in the endzone and drops the ball?
Gresham basically did the same thing
[/quote]


Sorry, you are wrong. The evidence is in the ruling and on the tape. Gresham's steps were not construed as a "football move" as he never completed the catch before falling to the ground.

Gresham was catching a pass, not diving over a pile as running back. Read all of the previous posts for a better understanding.

[Crabcakes&Football]

It was the right call according to the 'Calvin Johnson rule', which I am not a fan of. But it went in our favor so, hey I'll definitely take it this time at least. A win is a win is a win, I'm just glad we were able to get that. Cincy proved they are still gonna be a thorn in our side, it is what it is.

[Hardbaugh]

[quote name='ravensdfan' timestamp='1321924899' post='880898']
I like how the earlier play is getting ignored in all this. If you want Gresham's TD to stand, then to be fair, Cincy NEVER gets the chance to make that throw. Why? Because if Gresham's TD stands, then the play where they ruled an incomplete pass becomes a complete pass and a fumble, recovered by the Ravens. So Cincy does not even have possession in order to make that potential TD throw. End of story.
[/quote]

Exactly what I stated in the other thread on this. I thought it was a fumble recovered by the Ravens if that wasn't a catch neither was the second one, people can't have it both ways.

[BmoreRavens732]

I'm not an official but not being biased to me it didn't look like a TD but wether it really was or not it's about time an important n controversial call goes our way for once!! There always against us n it could of went either way but I'm glad it worked in our favor

[CapoRocky]

I sure bet that we would really be screaming on here if the call went against us rather than for us.

[FerrariFan87]

All objective observers have confirmed that the call was correct, and even though it's a terrible rule, it's a rule nonetheless. It's over now, and it's time for San Fran.

[atljbo]

Hearing them explain the rule...By the books.... It was a correct call... I just know it deosnt make sense to me..It needs to be changed... I know i would be pissed if it happened to my team.

[Suggs Package]

Actually, the ball came out of his hand before he hit the ground. So, technically, it was a fumble. But you can't fumble in the end zone so it should be a TD. That's if the rule actually made sense.

The refs go it right, but the rule is wrong. I think the only thing that should be required for a catch is control and two feet. All of this maintaining possessions is phooey. I want more fumbles!

The receiver should become a runner as soon as he's gotten two feet or a the torso down with the ball. No exceptions. That should make things easier on the refs.

I'm glad we benefited from a bad rule, but something like this can come back to bite us one day and I hope they fix it.

[YotaRaven]

The rules are the rules! He did not have control of the ball "through" the ground, hence the call was overturned correctly.

[Natty Boh]

I don't see why this call is so controversial. It is cut and dry according to the rule.

-Gresham stayed in bounds.
-Gresham did not gain control of the ball until after the ball crossed the goal line.
-Gresham did not secure the ball with 2 hands.
-Gresham essentially trapped the ball between his hand and the ground upon going down.
-The ball did wedge loose from his hand slightly and then he pulled it into his body.
-Gresham did not complete the process of the catch as per the official rule.

In my mind, you can argue whether or not you like that rule or if it should even be a rule but the officials got it right based on what the rule currently is.

I personally think it is a terrible rule and should be revisited by the Competition Committee.or whichever governing body addresses such issues.


Another thing I would like to add about this call although the end result should still have been the same is this...

[i](Sorry for quoting myself)[/i]

[b][i]"-Gresham essentially trapped the ball between his hand and the ground upon going down."[/i][/b]

Even if the ball did not squirt loose from his hand slightly, i feel that trapping the ball between his hand and the ground should have also made it incomplete.

[arnie_uk]

anybody see weklers TD pass, excat same as greshams except welkers was a TD becuase he broke the plane before dropping it when he hit the ground.. greshams wasnt because he gained control inside the EZ so had not plane to break..