Bengals Jermaine Gresham's catch/no catch
 

How was this not a catch?? THe NFL needs to change their rules....




http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com...n-johnson-rule



The "Calvin Johnson Rule" reared its ugly head again, this time in Baltimore's 31-24 win over Cincinnati in Week 11.

There's much debate surrounding the sequence of TE Jermaine Gresham's catch/no catch that would have brought the game to 31-28 with 5:35 left in the fourth quarter.

Sometimes, the ruling on the field is not well-explained, but it is still the correct call.



That appears to be the case here.

As it's written, the receiver must maintain possession after he hits the ground. The Calvin Johnson Rule is particularly controversial in end zone situations, but it applies everywhere on the field. It earned its name after Johnson, a receiver for the Detroit Lions, caught a pass in the end zone, but let the ball go before he stopped sliding on the ground. It was a highly controversial call, but according to the rules, the correct one.

Gresham originally touched the ball at about the 2-yard-line. He bobbled it toward the front pylon, and did not appear to have possession of the ball until the ball was just at the goal line.

Because of that, Gresham technically caught the ball in the end zone, therefore, he must maintain possession of it after he hits the ground. That's the main issue. There's no question he did not maintain possession when he goes to the ground, but if he was a runner on the play, it should have been called a touchdown. And the ball could not have been more than an inch or two over the line. It's hard to say it even was, but it was certainly close enough to suggest the call could fairly go either way.

While Ravens fans will likely praise the call, and Bengals fans will decry it, it could have gone either way. The ball was so close to the goal line, and without a replay from a camera that is flush with the goal line, it's extremely difficult to see if the ball does break the plane of the end zone when Gresham establishes possession

I knew they'd get it wrong as soon as they went under the hood.

This rule is !@#$ing stupid.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GtF_rIK8IHk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I'm not a huge fan of the NFL anymore. I used to watch every game I could. Now, I watch the Chiefs and maybe parts of another game or two each week, but it really doesn't interest me much. The rules are so ridiculous that it isn't worth my time.

NFL games are generally so close that one call can easily change the outcome of a game, and there are so many terrible rules/calls that the officials are more important than any player on the field besides the QBs.

Wow. He got ****ed on that one.

The real concern here is that people think it is a good idea to point a video camera at their tv and then put the horrendous output up on youtube.

I'm the same way. I'll watch the Chiefs, and then go one with my day. Or, just put it on NFL Redzone (or whatever it's call), and do chores etc.

I hated that call. That's so against the spirit of football. He caught that pass. It was a great football play.

The rule is completely terrible, but it was ruled correctly.

I don't like the fact that a different rule applies if the ball is caught in the endzone as opposed to the 2 yard line.

I have thought for years that if you have replay, you MUST have a goal line camera. Too many games don't have a good side view of the goal line.

TD imo.

That's bullshit. That rule should be changed. That was a TD as soon as he crossed the goal line.

what is bs asbout the rule is the inconsistency of it and how the general purpose of the ruld makes no sense. For example, why can you jump over the pile into the endzone, cross the plane, then have the ball knocked out, and it's still a td?

I had no idea how that could not be a touchdown.