View topic - Holmes TD - Screenshot

[stillcello Profile]

See attached... it's blurry, but it at least appears that when the ball first touches Holmes' hand... that some part of that 'blob' in the screenshot is the ball and that most of the blob is touching the plane.... close call for sure....too bad the cameraman didn't get locked in to that spot a bit quicker....

[Steel_Buckeye Profile]

TD

[SteelWolf62 Profile]

Nice, I was trying to capture that image myself and couldn't clear it up any.

[BenStiller Profile]

Someone said the shot from the blimp was the clearest one showing that it crossed the plane of the goal line. Maybe we need to put a ref in the blimp from now on.

[steelmoney Profile]

indisputable!

[indysteel Profile]

Let's clear this up...

Had the pass been along the sideline versus the goalline, we would not even be having this discussion. In those instances, the receivers feet are inbounds.....I can only assume that while the ball is "in flight" that it satisfies the need to cross the plane of the goal line (despite the fact that no one has "caught" it at that stage).

So, unless I'm missing something, because Tokio caught it with both feet in the endzone, it would be ruled a TD just as much as someone catching it along the sidelines or, hell, the back of the EZ for that matter.

In the end, I think crossing the plane of the goal line is only required when your FEET are not in the EZ. I could be wrong, but that is how I understand it.

[Teegre Profile]

Let's clear this up...

Had the pass been along the sideline versus the goalline, we would not even be having this discussion. In those instances, the receivers feet are inbounds.....I can only assume that while the ball is "in flight" that it satisfies the need to cross the plane of the goal line (despite the fact that no one has "caught" it at that stage).
So, unless I'm missing something, because Tokio caught it with both feet in the endzone, it would be ruled a TD just as much as someone catching it along the sidelines or, hell, the back of the EZ for that matter.

In the end, I think crossing the plane of the goal line is only required when your FEET are not in the EZ. I could be wrong, but that is how I understand it.

Actually, brother, you are indeed incorrect.

The ball has to cross the goal-line...period.

The reason that Santonio's feet were mentioned (as the reason that people are so confused) is because it was ruled a possession due to the fact that both of his feet were down (and his feet just so happened to be in the end-zone). In other words, he did not need to take two steps, because he established his "presences" (i.e. possession) via having both of his feet "on the ground."

In turn, since both of his feet were down...the very second he caught the ball, he established possession.

And, since the ball crossed the goal-line while in his possession...it was a touchdown.

Make sense?

[zapunto Profile]

How come no one is mentioning that the side judge that called the play did not even see it? He actually leans INTO the end zone to avoid Frank Walker, who is in his line of sight.

[indysteel Profile]

I guess.....I've not seen anything conclusive yet despite this being a topic of another thread.

Guess we really should not care too much. We won. On to the Titans.

[Stillustronic Profile]

Let's clear this up...

Had the pass been along the sideline versus the goalline, we would not even be having this discussion. In those instances, the receivers feet are inbounds.....I can only assume that while the ball is "in flight" that it satisfies the need to cross the plane of the goal line (despite the fact that no one has "caught" it at that stage).
So, unless I'm missing something, because Tokio caught it with both feet in the endzone, it would be ruled a TD just as much as someone catching it along the sidelines or, hell, the back of the EZ for that matter.

In the end, I think crossing the plane of the goal line is only required when your FEET are not in the EZ. I could be wrong, but that is how I understand it.

Actually, brother, you are indeed incorrect.

The ball has to cross the goal-line...period.

The reason that Santonio's feet were mentioned (as the reason that people are so confused) is because it was ruled a possession due to the fact that both of his feet were down (and his feet just so happened to be in the end-zone). In other words, he did not need to take two steps, because he established his "presences" (i.e. possession) via having both of his feet "on the ground."

In turn, since both of his feet were down...the very second he caught the ball, he established possession.

And, since the ball crossed the goal-line while in his possession...it was a touchdown.

Make sense?

Correct. One thing about establishing a completed pass is that if Santonio lost the ball when he hit the ground it could have been called incomplete, whether it happened OOB, out of the back of the end zone, or in this case at about the 2 yd line. One has to finish the play maintaining possession after they hit the ground, review last year's San Fran game for an example of someone not maintaining possession when he hit the ground thus did not fumble but the play was ruled incomplete.

Look familiar?








Officials have high def review to view, this is regular broadcast resolution.

[Hagerstown Steelman Profile]

Link to Post Gazette webstite that gives the NFL rule and that the ruling was correct.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08351/935432-66.stm

an excerpt is below:

By rule, his feet did not have to be down, however, when the ball crossed the goal line -- he had to be in possession of the ball when it broke the plane of the goal line and then to complete the play his feet had to touch the ground.

"When he gained control of the ball," Coleman said, "the ball was breaking the plane and then he fell into the field of play."

This makes sense. To make sure Santonio held onto the ball he had to maintain possession through the ground.

Now lets Rock the Titans.

[shawnlucas Profile]

Similar to some fouls in the NBA, possession in the NFL is continuous.

He caught the ball, pulled it back across the goal line (barely, but it does touch the goal line) to ensure that he would get credit for the touchdown, then completed possession by getting two feet down and maintaining control of the ball as he fell.

He does not have to do all three simultaneously in order to get credit for the touchdown. Crossing the goal line does not have to occur after possession, either. Think of most touchdown passes. The ball crosses the goal line in flight, then possession is gained by the receiver.

Bob Costas said that this is an example of what is wrong with replay and he is completely and utterly wrong in this case. He completely contradicted himself by saying that replay is there to get it right, not to micromanage every call in the game to death.

That is not what happened here. The play happened far too fast in real time and Steelers fans were yelling "Touchdown!" while Rats fans were crying "No f'n way!" The play went up to the booth, where the official saw INDISPUTABLE evidence that he maintained possession and had the wherewithal to bring the ball over the goal line while gaining possession to get credit for the touchdown.

Any fans and media who are crying foul over this are just butt hurt (which I don't understand in the media's case as this set up one of two games for the #1 seed in the second to last week of the season, so that is mostly just fans bitching) or simply trying to start controversy as a lead in to their big games coming up this weekend (ah, that's the media's angle).