mrags Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 doesent matter. A few years ago, Hines Ward caught a "TD" at the goal line where the ball never got close to the line, but his feet were in, and they counted it... i swear its because he established himself in the end zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kipers Hair Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 Did aliens crashland in Roswell New Mexico? Does it matter? Did the ball cross the plane? Does it matter? All that matters is 2-4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 Did aliens crashland in Roswell New Mexico? Does it matter? Did the ball cross the plane? Does it matter? All that matters is 2-4. If we never hear from you again, we'll know whether it matters or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted October 15, 2013 Author Share Posted October 15, 2013 I just looked at the play again on the rewind and the all 22. It was close, but looks like a TD to me because his feet came down in the EZ with the ball already crossed. The official (side judge) immediately ruled it a TD. Thanks for the screen grab. That looks much closer than the angle from the other end zone which was on the tv coverage. So much so, I don't se it as an issue. That SJ was suspect all game. That's part of the reason I wanted to see a better angle. Thanks. i swear its because he established himself in the end zone. The ball has to cross the plane. Simple and plane rule. Same for safety. You can tackle the QB in the end zone but if the ball is held out of end zone it is not a safety. There is no debate to this fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 I just looked at the play again on the rewind and the all 22. It was close, but looks like a TD to me because his feet came down in the EZ with the ball already crossed. The official (side judge) immediately ruled it a TD. Thanks. Looks like a td to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12Kachy Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 Who cares? It's over, on to the next obstacle. Squish the fish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted October 15, 2013 Author Share Posted October 15, 2013 Who cares? It's over, on to the next obstacle. Squish the fish! This post can go on to any thread. If you don't care about the thread. Don't post in the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 Thanks for the screen grab. That looks much closer than the angle from the other end zone which was on the tv coverage. So much so, I don't se it as an issue. That SJ was suspect all game. That's part of the reason I wanted to see a better angle. Thanks. The ball has to cross the plane. Simple and plane rule. Same for safety. You can tackle the QB in the end zone but if the ball is held out of end zone it is not a safety. There is no debate to this fact. I too, thought that was the rule, but they call it a TD when just your feet are in. The Hines Ward play I refer to was the best example I have seen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted October 15, 2013 Author Share Posted October 15, 2013 I too, thought that was the rule, but they call it a TD when just your feet are in. The Hines Ward play I refer to was the best example I have seen... incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 incorrect. No, it's correct. They did call it a touchdown. You (and I) can argue it was the incorrect call, but they DID call it a touchdown and the ball was literally a yard from breaking the plane... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted October 15, 2013 Author Share Posted October 15, 2013 No, it's correct. They did call it a touchdown. You (and I) can argue it was the incorrect call, but they DID call it a touchdown and the ball was literally a yard from breaking the plane... A blown call doesn't mean the rule is different. The ball must break the plane of the goaline. There is no discussion. That is the rule. It doesn't matter where the person's feet are, as long as they are anywhere inbounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gasjuggler Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 So if a running back goes feet first into the ez and the ball doesn't cross, that's a td?and yes certain teams like the Pats get the calls. On Brady's winning td this week Solder had a obvious hold on the play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 No, it's correct. They did call it a touchdown. You (and I) can argue it was the incorrect call, but they DID call it a touchdown and the ball was literally a yard from breaking the plane... I remember that game. steelers/ravens in baltimore. i think it was santonio Holmes, not Hines ward. And the refs called it a TD because the ball crossed the plane. As I recall, camera angles weren't great on that one either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 So if a running back goes feet first into the ez and the ball doesn't cross, that's a td?and yes certain teams like the Pats get the calls. On Brady's winning td this week Solder had a obvious hold on the play. everyone is saying that my opinion is wrong. And I will concede because I don't know the rule. But my argument against your take, is that in your scenario, the RB isn't already in the end zone. In my scenario, the WR was already in the end zone, and established himself in the end zone, therefore, if he caught the ball out of the end zone (say the 6 inch line) it wouldn't matter because his feet were already in the end zone at the point of the reception. It's actually very similar to the homer run throwback argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 everyone is saying that my opinion is wrong. And I will concede because I don't know the rule. But my argument against your take, is that in your scenario, the RB isn't already in the end zone. In my scenario, the WR was already in the end zone, and established himself in the end zone, therefore, if he caught the ball out of the end zone (say the 6 inch line) it wouldn't matter because his feet were already in the end zone at the point of the reception. It's actually very similar to the homer run throwback argument. Regardless of the scenario, it's not a TD unless the ball crosses the plane of the End Zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 Regardless of the scenario, it's not a TD unless the ball crosses the plane of the End Zone. i know. You already put me in my place. I was just arguing my opinion of the topic and how it might have been the other way. Thank you for putting me in my place again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted October 15, 2013 Author Share Posted October 15, 2013 everyone is saying that my opinion is wrong. And I will concede because I don't know the rule. But my argument against your take, is that in your scenario, the RB isn't already in the end zone. In my scenario, the WR was already in the end zone, and established himself in the end zone, therefore, if he caught the ball out of the end zone (say the 6 inch line) it wouldn't matter because his feet were already in the end zone at the point of the reception. It's actually very similar to the homer run throwback argument. Are you talking about the Music City Forward Latteral? The argument for the play is the same as the ball breaking the plane. It doesn't matter that Wychek was behind Dyson resulting in a forward pass. The blind miracle people say he actually threw the ball backwards and Dyson put his hand back. Which is of course utter bS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 i know. You already put me in my place. I was just arguing my opinion of the topic and how it might have been the other way. Thank you for putting me in my place again. It's a TSW Public Service. J/K Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djp14150 Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 i believe you're incorrect, mrags By rule if both feet are in the endzone its a TD....even if he is pushed back and the ball didnt break the plane. This has happened countless times of players catching the ball with both feet in the endzone but he wasnt allowed to stand up ahich would then bring the ball in the end zone. If you are standing outside the endzone the ball must break the plane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drop Kick Flutie Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Are you talking about the Music City Forward Latteral? The argument for the play is the same as the ball breaking the plane. It doesn't matter that Wychek was behind Dyson resulting in a forward pass. The blind miracle people say he actually threw the ball backwards and Dyson put his hand back. Which is of course utter bS. Clearly a lateral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts