What is a catch? Inbounds or out of bounds?

[smithandrew051]

Originally Posted by kcgreene

I liked the ruling because I started Garrett Wilson in Fantasy, so obviously the refs were correct.

If I was playing him, I'd have opposed the ruling and the refs would have been cheating bastards.

It's the simple things sometimes...

I like it because it was good for the Chiefs.

Would not support if it was bad for the Chiefs.

[ThaVirus]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I hope not. That's gonna be one of those rule changes that create more headaches than it solves.

I mean, what if a 'toe drag' ends up a 'toe skip' and you double tap the same foot twice. Is that 'two steps' because the toe bounced off the ground before it re-connected? Now do we have to start seeing how high the foot lifted to determine if it 'broke contact with the grass' before it came down again, thus constituting the same foot twice?

That's gonna be a shitshow. Please don't get into all that.

As you've noted - at a point this is all theatre either way. Why should it be 2 rather than 1 as in college? No reason - it's arbitrary. So it's not like we're leaning on any fundamental laws of nature here.

If the rule says get two feet down rather than 1 foot down twice, well that's the damn rule. Execute that.

Good point. Yeah, **** reviewing that then.

[ReynardMuldrake]

In my opinion, it was too close to overturn. It was a very close call and really could have been called either way. In real time I thought he was out.

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by ReynardMuldrake

In my opinion, it was too close to overturn. It was a very close call and really could have been called either way. In real time I thought he was out.

Well, real time doesn't matter for replay.

It was close. And given their general conservationism regarding overturning calls, I can understand the argument.

If you showed the clip without context, I would say TD.

If you said live call was OOB, should replay overturn, yea, I would say it is a borderline decision to overturn. But given you have to decide, personally, I would overturn.

No, I don't care about outcome of this game that much.

[Frazod]

That was one of those plays where I wouldn't have had a problem with either outcome. It was that close. But like I said in the game thread, I'm glad it was ruled a touchdown, simply because it was such a spectacular catch.

Wouldn't feel that way if it had gone against us, though.

[scho63]

Good discussion

[TEX]

Last I checked, his shin and calf are all part of the leg and so is the knee. Part of the leg landed out of bounds, so it was out. I mean week one, all of Smiley's feet were in bounds except the very tips of his toes, and it didn't count.

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by TEX

Last I checked, his shin and calf are all part of the leg and so is the knee. Part of the leg landed out of bounds. I mean week one, all of Smiley's feet were in bounds except the very tips of his toes, and it didn't count.

So if the toes come down, say in bounds, and then the heel OOB, it is still considered the entire foot as one object. You don't separate toes from heel.

You do separate shin from knee. Because rule.

I mean, you separate knee from hip. You have to make rules and stick with them.
But maybe shin and knee should all be leg, you could have done that.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

You need unclear rules to control point spreads

[Garcia Bronco]

It's OOB to me.