The fact that another person came away with it says that is a stupid thing to say. The catch is not over as soon as you hit the ground. Again I say this, if Jarvis would have instead just dropped the ball at the exact same time rather than the defender take it from him it would have been an incomplete pass 100 times out of a hundred.
Jarvis West Fumble
- Thread starter 2forISU
- Start date
I dont think I have ever seen someone so sure and so wrong as you are. It will make me feel better if you just tell us you are trolling.
Since you seem to think fotball is played in a polaroid flipbook, here you go.
As you see, west is still about a foot off the ground and the ball is in #15's hand.
You said this was before Jarvis hit the ground.He's already on the ground here. Check his knee.
If jarvis dropped the balk when he contacted the ground you would be right. But he didnt. He had complete control of the ball. He didnt lose control of the ball.
Your argument is completely ridiculous. You are actually stating that a defender that has zero possession of the ball can take it away from a receiver with complete possession after hitting the ground!@@!@
When? When has this ever happened in the history if football?
The fact that you ignore the key points of a completely secured ball after going to his knees tells me you really havent paid enough attention to these situations.
When has this ever happened!
He obviously did. Just pretend he dropped it and it fell on the other guys hands.
The fact that you realize that it would have been incomplete had he just dropped the ball tells me that you do understand that you have to complete the process of the catch, so why don't you understand that if the defender pulls it away before he completes the process that it's an interception?
Oh that was the earlier argument when pkt13 and other posters were saying you had to have your entire body on the ground. They have since quietly backed off those statements of course.
Because you simply do not. They were completely wrong.
Because you simply do not. They were completely wrong.
Because you are suggesting that the rule allows a defender to pull the secured ball from a receiver while his knees are on the ground and he had complete control of the ball.
This was not a simultaneous play. Thats the issue. The defender pries the ball out after the receiver has secured the catch.
Its a catch. It was a catch in real speed and after. I have never seen this be called an interception. Its not the same as losing control of the ball when tje ground is contacted. West had already met that criteria.
This was not a simultaneous play. Thats the issue. The defender pries the ball out after the receiver has secured the catch.
Its a catch. It was a catch in real speed and after. I have never seen this be called an interception. Its not the same as losing control of the ball when tje ground is contacted. West had already met that criteria.
Originally Posted by NCAA Rulebook
c. A player who touches a pylon is out of bounds.
I apparently stand corrected. But I do wonder how it jives with this.
Seems like there is some ambiguity in the rulebook. Will probably be sorted out after the season. Once again at ISU's expense. Not reviewing it was ridiculous.
I believe the pylon is out of bounds but it's out of bounds past the goal line. Like if a ball is fumbled and rolls into the pylon it's considered out of bounds behind the goal line so a safety or a touchback as the case may be.
A defender can relieve the receiver of possession at any time before he has completed the process of catching the ball.
If the defender would have hit Jarvis causing him to drop the ball the same rule would apply, it just so happens that the ball never touched the ground but was instead taken by the defender.
Does it make you feel better if you make things up? Nobody anywhere said you have to have your whole body on ground and I certainly didnt. What was said is that if you are going to the ground, which he was, you have to control the ball all the way through, not just for a split second when your knee touches, which he didnt.
How is it possible to tell who is trolling and who is just stupid now anyways? All these people who created accounts last week or have under 100 posts but have been here for 8 years or so make it so damn hard to figure out. Then let's not leave out the guys that are on their alts or 7th activated accounts chiming in to make things even more of a jumbled mess then it needs to be.
Yeah I've definitely seen the case where a ball hits the pylon it is considered out and a touchback or whatever. But I still think that is a particular case of determining whether the goal line has been crossed when it went out of bounds. In this case it is just determining whether the receiver was considered out of bounds. In this case say the pylon fell over due to the wind just as the play took place the catch would be considered good. It doesn't make sense that in one case the catch is good while the other it is not. I think their is some ambiguity in the rule that should be cleared up. To me the logical rule should be that the pylon is only used to determine whether the goal line is crossed. But I agree given the rule as written the wrong call was made.
I don't think he ever tucked the ball. Had he made some sort of football move, it would of been a bad call. The more I see it in motion, the more I conclude that Jarvis never had possession.
Regardless, Jarvis needs to learn to not lose grip on the ball until he hears a whistle.
I don't feel like starting another thread on Jarvis, but... question:
Does Jarvis have a chance of getting a sniff at the NFL? I don't really follow that stuff, just curious. Seems like he could be a decent slot receiver/return guy.
Does Jarvis have a chance of getting a sniff at the NFL? I don't really follow that stuff, just curious. Seems like he could be a decent slot receiver/return guy.
It wasn't a terrible call. It was a close call, but not a terrible one. College football has the same "Calvin Johnson" rule where you must maintain possession through the process of the catch.
By looking at only photos, Calvin Johnson was "down" too:
We have a gripe with the pylon play. But not this one.
By looking at only photos, Calvin Johnson was "down" too:
We have a gripe with the pylon play. But not this one.
