Bad Calls Compilation Video
- Thread starter MLawrence
- Start date
Hmmm, it seems like the play that Rhoads challenged in the first half against OSU should have gone our way....
See this is the problem. You think that there is no possible way that you can be wrong. There are multiple angles that you can argue for that call being wrong as well as you can argue it was right. That play isn't an obvious wrong call, but it isn't an obvious correct call either.
The one I look at is that Jarvis going down and Jarvis being flipped were two seperate actions.
I think it's only not obvious if you're going by some other rule book that might not require a player to maintain control all the way through the process of going to the ground.
Yes....really. You do not have to lie down in the ground to complete a catch. Thay is the argument you are making.
This really isnt hard to understand but people get so caught up in what they are told or what people dont understand.
I can catch a ball drop to my knees and complete a catch as long as I am in control of the ball and my body. Ive seen it hundreds of times and it meets the rules. There is no debate on this issue. I dont have to roll on tje ground to complete a catch. Going to the ground is dropping to your knees!!!@@@@
I get that the officials dont have a clue but thats not news. If what you say is accurate, you could never make a catch without rolling on the ground. Crazy talk.
This really isnt hard to understand but people get so caught up in what they are told or what people dont understand.
I can catch a ball drop to my knees and complete a catch as long as I am in control of the ball and my body. Ive seen it hundreds of times and it meets the rules. There is no debate on this issue. I dont have to roll on tje ground to complete a catch. Going to the ground is dropping to your knees!!!@@@@
I get that the officials dont have a clue but thats not news. If what you say is accurate, you could never make a catch without rolling on the ground. Crazy talk.
Nobody in this history of this board has ever made such an argument.
You seem to be under the impression that we are saying you HAVE to go to the ground to make the catch, obviously this is false and nobody has said anything of the sort. Now if you do go to the ground you do have to complete the entire process. That much is very clear in the rules.
If you catch the ball and fall to your knees and maintain control that is a catch, that's not what happened to West though, the contact drove him to his knees and then to the ground, he had control when he hit his knees but then lost it to the defender before he had completed the entire process of going to the ground.
This is from the NCAA Football Case Book which is their manual that shows situations and how to properly apply the rules.
I think what it really comes down to is when he has control of the ball and made the catch. If it is before he starts falling to the ground it is a catch and he is down as soon as he touches the ground. If he doesn't have control until after he starts falling then he has to maintain control through the entire contact with the ground meaning through any fall, contact with the ground and roll over if that is what happens due to his fall. If in doubt, it is incomplete.
Interestingly I came across this as well:
K-State, anyone?
If what you said is true, then please tell me how the K-State player can take to ball out of Jarvis's hands with his right hand continue completely roll on to his back and sit up, at the same time pass the ball behind his back and hold it up after the catch with his left hand. Do all that without the ball toughing the ground. We can argue all day (and we have) on whether Jarvis was down or not, but the if it wasn't a catch, then it would have had to be an incomplete pass, because the K-State player could not have passed the ball behind his back while rolling on his back without the ball touching the ground.
I agree on the catch/strip of Jarvis, but what about the K-State player maintaining possession. After all, the K-State player stripped it with his right hand, rolled on his back while transferring the ball from his right hand to his left hand behind his back. No way he could do that without the ball touching the ground.
Because he's a very good athlete? I'm not sure what the question is. It's not like this kind of play happens regularly, the margin of error is very slim. The defender has to initiate contact and steal the ball basically at the exact same time as the ball reaches the receiver, take it away completely before the catch has been completed, and do it all without the ball hitting the ground. It just turns out that that's what happened.
Yeah, he Houdini'd that ball somehow. I watched that replay about 50 times and still can't figure out how the ball switched hands. He might as well have pulled it from behind Jarvis' ear.
I don't think the ball hit the ground based on any replay I saw, but technically it can hit the ground as long as control is still maintained. It does seem to magically teleport between his hands, I have no idea how he managed to do it.
Kind of how the ball magically teleported from the Texas runner's hands after he went down to George's hands who was already a couple of yards downfield running the other way. But I digress.
And Keith Langford's toe was over the line on that 3-point shot to force overtime. Should have been a 2. There were still 28 seconds left in regulation, but ISU should have still had the lead. I'm trying to find a pic but I'm being foiled.
