Welcome to goTitans.com! Log in or sign up to be a part of the best Tennessee Titans fan site available.

Troy Polamalu Int?

Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by #90, Jan 15, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Watchers:
This thread is being watched by 3 users.
  1. TitanFan62702 Guest

    Messages:
    0
    The NFL has released a statement that they made a mistake -- admitted it was an interception and the call should NOT have been reversed.

    Just announced on NFL Network.
  2. Puck Pro Bowler

    Messages:
    13,051
    Moolah:
    $111
    I don't.... but it might be available online somewhere and might even be on NFL.com's website by now
    I'm sure you'll be able to see it several times on ESPN's Sportscenter or PrimeTime

    and thanks for the support - you're right
    if it were an incomplete pass, then where was the whistle ?
    watching it over and over on replay should have supported the original call. somehow the ref got the wording in the rule confused

    I can imagine him saying " hmmm,.... the ball came out when his knee was still down" , but what he failed to account for was that the player had already made a 'football move' while having possession


    the argument Vig is making is that the ball came loose while he was on the ground. and while I respect his opinion thats just ridiculous
    You mean to tell me that if a play catches the ball (CLEARLY), then gets on his knees (while possessing it) sits there for a few seconds (while possessing it) ..... THEN tosses it away (while still kneeled) that it's an incomplete pass ?
  3. KobeChaz Guest

    Messages:
    0

    Did you take the time to read the article that Puck posted? The referee did not cite some obscure rule(ie. tuck). Now, as far as reading the Official Rulebook. No, I have not. But, I feel that any fan that watches football week in and week out is familiar enough with the Official Rule in regards to "having possession" of the football. Since it comes into question almost every game. Here is the definition from that abbreviated, easy-reading, glossed-over version at NFL.com

    Possession: When a player controls the ball throughout the act of clearly touching both feet, or any other part of his body other than his hand(s), to the ground inbounds.

    Seems somewhat vague. But, at the same time. Seems pretty clear! Now, don't forget this is the version that the NFL put out for the fans, media, and so on to interpret the rules. So, IMO Polamalu met the criteria set forth to establish possession. If he lost the ball after establishing that possession. Then he "Fumbled" the ball afterwards. In no way does that take away that Possession that he had already established.
  4. Puck Pro Bowler

    Messages:
    13,051
    Moolah:
    $111

    Thank You

    I wonder how this would play out had the Colts scored the winning TD off of that play. What if the Colts HAD won and then the league comes out and claims that the play that gave them the ball that resulted in the score that won the game should not have been ruled in that particular manner, so in essence the Colts should not have had the ball nor the opportunity to score?
    :stars:
    Talk about a freaking mess
  5. Puck Pro Bowler

    Messages:
    13,051
    Moolah:
    $111
    co-sign
    PuckDaddy
  6. Vigsted Starter

    Messages:
    4,247
    Moolah:
    $1,432
    The whistle didn't blow because they originally called it an interception. And the play didn't stop until Polamalu was touched down.

    And no, that's where I think the part about it being a judgement call comes into play. The same could be argued about a receiver catching the football, while standing still and not moving for 5 seconds, would that be an incompletion considering he didn't move at all? Besides if a players makes no effort to get off the ground I'm pretty sure the officials will call the play dead, for safety reasons, but that's another discussion.
  7. Puck Pro Bowler

    Messages:
    13,051
    Moolah:
    $111
    Nice debate Vig
    had fun with it while it lasted
    i believe it's over:

  8. Vigsted Starter

    Messages:
    4,247
    Moolah:
    $1,432
    But as I already stated, that rule description doesn't cover all the technicalities that goes into what is a catch.
  9. Vigsted Starter

    Messages:
    4,247
    Moolah:
    $1,432
    Depends. I still maintain the official had the "legal" foundation to make that call and that it's an interpretation issue, where the official and NFL disagreed. What I was trying to tell KobeChaz was that the rules are complex and open to interpretation and in this case the official made the wrong one (and so did I), however I understand where his line of thinking comes from.

    Btw, I'm a little annoyed that Pereira doesn't go into more detail than just say "He maintained possession long enough to establish a catch.", because "long enough" is to me a very subjective term.
    • Tip Jar Donor

    Gunny Lord and Master

    Wright
    Messages:
    46,266
    Moolah:
    $2,002
    Sheesh even the NFL admits it was the wrong call and your still debating.

    :ha: sticking by your guns allright.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page