Login

**BleedNOrange** · 10-05-2015, 09:10 AM

It's a terrible rule but here is how Mike Carrey (sp?) explained it...

Maclin got his 2nd foot down before the defender engaged. They deemed this a football move so it was irrelevant that he lost control going to the ground.

On the Eifert "catch", the defended touched him before he established possession so he had to maintain control all the way.

So basically, the NFL thinks 4 steps with possession is less of a catch than 2 steps simply because a defender is touching you. Makes no sense at all.

It didn't cost us the game so I'm not going to dwell on it. However, it is only a matter of time before it does.

**GodFather** · 10-05-2015, 09:39 AM

The officiating was probably the worst Ive seen in a professional football game in years. Were these refs interning or something? The missed Eifert hold with the ref right in front of them was ridiculous. Luckily, we had a major missed call go our way too. The fumble recover would've normally been ruled down.

**Daddy-O** · 10-05-2015, 09:50 AM

(10-04-2015, 11:36 PM)EatonFan Wrote: I thought the play Marvin challenged was going to be incomplete as it was just like the Eifert non-TD catch. He didn't have time to establish himself and he clearly lost the ball going to the ground. By rule: Incomplete. Yet somehow they said he established himself with two steps and Eifert didn't with 4 steps!

Exactly what I was thinking and made a post about last week. The league is so inconsistent with this rule and interpret it differently near the goal line. I am okay yesterday stating the KC receiver had possession because he had established himself as a runner, but putting that side-by-side Eifert's play in Baltimore is maddening. Not only did he take 3 or 4 steps but he turned up field to reach the ball over the goal line. Total BS call. Officiating in the NFL has gotten terrible. No, it's always been terrible, just now more terrible!

**kevin** · 10-05-2015, 10:04 AM

# 1 : WE WON
# 2 : I think Chiefs are more upset over the officials considering the Chiefs fumble that TV announcers thought should have been over turned because they thought Chiefs player was down by contact. It was a bang bang play and refs decided not to reverse it and camera angles were inconclusive. That led to a key score for Bengals.....I thought the officials were great on this play for our Bengals.

**corpjet** · 10-05-2015, 10:08 AM

I still don't understand what constitutes a catch in the NFL, I think that interpretation may change weekly and differ per officiating crew.

**Rattler** · 10-05-2015, 10:11 AM

Hills 2 point conversion being called no good was the Lenscrafter's call of the century.

He was across by over a yard!

Blind old men need to step aside and assume the La-z-boy position.

***Wyche'sWarrior*** · 10-05-2015, 01:49 PM

(10-04-2015, 11:33 PM)EatonFan Wrote: No they didn't. If you watch the play MJ's hand hits the ball, then the knee, then you see the ball clearly come out. It takes a split second for the ball to leave the torso. The ball was fumbled. How do you know? It's obvious what caused the fumble -- MJ hitting the ball. Therefore he had to have lost control once his hand hit the football. You can't see it real well as it's a bang bang type play. I was one that said whatever the call was on the field -- that was going to be the call.

.....but it wasn't the knee that made him down, it was the elbow. Which hit before MJ punched the ball out.

**GreenCornBengal** · 10-05-2015, 01:50 PM

Ah and here is the thread I missed when making my officiating thread this morning :snark:

WELL I AGREE

**XenoMorph** · 10-05-2015, 01:51 PM

(10-04-2015, 11:33 PM)EatonFan Wrote: No they didn't. If you watch the play MJ's hand hits the ball, then the knee, then you see the ball clearly come out. It takes a split second for the ball to leave the torso. The ball was fumbled. How do you know? It's obvious what caused the fumble -- MJ hitting the ball. Therefore he had to have lost control once his hand hit the football. You can't see it real well as it's a bang bang type play. I was one that said whatever the call was on the field -- that was going to be the call.

it looked like he ripped it away after he was down to me but ill take it.

**GreenCornBengal** · 10-05-2015, 01:52 PM

(10-05-2015, 09:10 AM)BleedNOrange Wrote: It's a terrible rule but here is how Mike Carrey (sp?) explained it...

Maclin got his 2nd foot down before the defender engaged. They deemed this a football move so it was irrelevant that he lost control going to the ground.

On the Eifert "catch", the defended touched him before he established possession so he had to maintain control all the way.

So basically, the NFL thinks 4 steps with possession is less of a catch than 2 steps simply because a defender is touching you. Makes no sense at all.

It didn't cost us the game so I'm not going to dwell on it. However, it is only a matter of time before it does.

Carrey, the expert, also thought that MJ's forced fumble wasn't a fumble.

It PISSED ME OFF how wilcotts and crew kept being like OH YEP THE REFS GOT THAT WRONG, HIS ELBOW WAS DOWN.

when CLEARLY! his elbow was not down and it was a fumble.

**XenoMorph** · 10-05-2015, 01:53 PM

(10-04-2015, 11:36 PM)EatonFan Wrote: I thought the play Marvin challenged was going to be incomplete as it was just like the Eifert non-TD catch. He didn't have time to establish himself and he clearly lost the ball going to the ground. By rule: Incomplete. Yet somehow they said he established himself with two steps and Eifert didn't with 4 steps!

that rule might be different for the END zone but i agree it was either incomplete or a fumble.

Eifert was being contacted it the moment he had the ball so guess they figured it was all part of the tackle.

**spazz70** · 10-05-2015, 03:17 PM

Comparing that catch and Eifert's catch is not possible. Eifert's was at the goal line...that rule is different than in the field of play and sideline rules.

Also, How in the hell did we get a personal foul called on us during a review? The Chiefs had already ran another play(almost) and then they review for Marv's challenge and they come back with the decision and then call a personal foul? I could not hear it and was so confused??

**spazz70** · 10-05-2015, 03:39 PM

If a WR catches the ball and runs 50 yards downfield and gets pushed out of bounds and fumbles it was it a catch? There is no difference...Established in the field of play as a runner was determined....No fumble when he went out of bounds...Eifert at goal line...Calvin Johnson rule...MUST land in the end zone with complete control of the ball

Ricky Spanish · 10-05-2015, 03:41 PM

They talked a little about this on Sirius NFL Radio this morning.

Apparently the NFL has had about a 20% turnover in new officials. Hopefully the flags will be toned down a little. They have set a record high across the league

**Tankvet** · 10-05-2015, 03:54 PM

The Hill 2pt was an awful call and rightly overturned, ref couldn't see clearly.... but I'm happy it happened because I LOVED hearing the crowd lose its shit when they watched the stadium replay.

**magikod** · 10-05-2015, 03:57 PM

Refs suck in the NFL, nothing new here. Sad

**PV Bengal** · 10-05-2015, 04:42 PM

(10-05-2015, 03:17 PM)spazz70 Wrote: Comparing that catch and Eifert's catch is not possible. Eifert's was at the goal line...that rule is different than in the field of play and sideline rules.

Actually, I don't think the rules are different. The only thing that matters is this: IS THE RECEIVER A RUNNER? In other words, has the receiver done "something" that changes his "status" from receiver to runner. That "something" is (1)getting both feet on the ground; and (2) making a "football move" once both feet are down. OK that's two "somethings" but WTF.

Let's say that Eifert's catch had gone a little differently ... Eifert catches the ball. Eifert takes 2 or 3 steps and is in possession of the football. Eifert reaches for the goal line and the ball crosses it. Eifert gets coldcocked by a defender and loses the ball.

Since the ball crossed the goal line in Eifert's possession and Eifert was a "runner" at the time, it would be a touchdown.

This is no different than if a running back stretches for the goal line and the ball crosses the goal line with the running back in possession and then a defender swipes the ball away. It is still a touchdown because the running back was in possession of the football when the football crossed the goal line.

On Maclin's catch, he got both feet down and then took a step or two, got coldcocked then lost the ball out of bounds. See #'s 1 and 2 above ... that's why the pass was called complete. Had the exact same thing happened at one of the "hashes", the call would have been "reception and fumble" (hopefully recovered by the Bengals).

**StoneTheCrow** · 10-05-2015, 04:48 PM

(10-05-2015, 01:52 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Carrey, the expert, also thought that MJ's forced fumble wasn't a fumble.

It PISSED ME OFF how wilcotts and crew kept being like OH YEP THE REFS GOT THAT WRONG, HIS ELBOW WAS DOWN.

when CLEARLY! his elbow was not down and it was a fumble.

Anybody who considers Carey an expert is a casual fan. I can't stand the sound of that guy's voice or the sight of his crusty upper lip.

**JADefense** · 10-05-2015, 09:49 PM

(10-05-2015, 03:41 PM)Ricky Spanish Wrote: They talked a little about this on Sirius NFL Radio this morning.

Apparently the NFL has had about a 20% turnover in new officials. Hopefully the flags will be toned down a little. They have set a record high across the league

Making it hard to watch the NFL with all the flags. I may be wrong but I think Buffalo had 17 penalties yesterday. Giants had 10-11 so you're looking at 28 penalties in one game.

**bonesaw** · 10-05-2015, 09:52 PM

Berry holding Eifert down the sideline was the one that pissed me off the most as the referee was staring right at them with a perfect view of it. And crickets.....

But Kelce's fumble was close and the Dalton fumble vs San Diego they said was an incompletion both went our way. The amount of flags has been brutal. IT makes it hard watching

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me