Bears at Lions 10/18 at noon on fox

[JonJayCutler]

After reading a couple different perspectives I actually didn't have a problem with that being ruled a catch and TD. He had firm possession in the end zone and had just taken his 3rd step when the ball squirted out, should be simple enough. It's kinda apples/oranges to the Dez call because the ground was a factor there and the end zone wasn't.

 

The whole problem for me comes when comparing it to the Megatron no-catch in 2010. Perhaps it would be easier if the NFL finally admitted they got it wrong as it was an even more obvious TD than Tate's.

[minnesotacubsfan]

ball is coming loose on his second step. i dont know, it really could have gone either way. And what "football" move did he make?

[Flames24Rulz]

ball is coming loose on his second step. i dont know, it really could have gone either way. And what "football" move did he make?

 

The inconsistencies of the rules are what I don't get. I thought he didn't complete the full "process" of the catch because the ball was coming loose just as he got his second step down. They ruled it on the field as an interception, so my interpretation is that you needed indisputable evidence to overturn the call. The more replays that I saw, the more it appeared to me that the initial call was the correct one and that it should've been an INT.

 

Then again, I don't understand what a catch is anymore. Admittedly, I thought that Calvin Johnson rule was a catch, Dez's was a catch, Devonta Freeman's reception last week was a catch, and I thought this was a pick, so what the hell do I know? At this point, I think every NFL officiating crew is guessing with the catch rules.

[jersey cubs fan]

ball is coming loose on his second step. i dont know, it really could have gone either way. And what "football" move did he make?

 

The inconsistencies of the rules are what I don't get. I thought he didn't complete the full "process" of the catch because the ball was coming loose just as he got his second step down. They ruled it on the field as an interception, so my interpretation is that you needed indisputable evidence to overturn the call. The more replays that I saw, the more it appeared to me that the initial call was the correct one and that it should've been an INT.

 

Then again, I don't understand what a catch is anymore. Admittedly, I thought that Calvin Johnson rule was a catch, Dez's was a catch, Devonta Freeman's reception last week was a catch, and I thought this was a pick, so what the hell do I know? At this point, I think every NFL officiating crew is guessing with the catch rules.

I never bought the "I don't know what a catch is anymore" until they ruled this was a catch. They had gotten fairly consistent ruling that you basically needed to actually catch the ball and keep it for it to be a catch. If nobody caught that ball I guarantee they just rule it incomplete and nothing comes up it.

[sneakypower]

He had firm possession in the end zone and had just taken his 3rd step when the ball squirted out

i think yours is an accurate interpretation

 

https://gfycat.com/MeagerElaborateBoto#?speed=0.25

[Guest]

NFL rule book 3-2-7 Item 2:

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[JonJayCutler]

He had firm possession in the end zone and had just taken his 3rd step when the ball squirted out

i think yours is an accurate interpretation

 

https://gfycat.com/MeagerElaborateBoto#?speed=0.25

 

I figured you would agree with me.

[Omar]

I'm kinda happy they lost even though the LOLIONS are annoying. All the wins this season are meaningless and my guess is Fox will be gone after a few years of losing.

 

also draft pick

[Guest]

Its k8nd of annoying to have lost to the crappiest franchise in sports like 10 times in a row.

[Guest]

how the [expletive] did you manage to dig up this thread?

[Sammy Sofa]

Being that drunk over a 7-9 Bears time probably is something one should look into as a larger thing.