Jump to content

OTTAWA @ CALGARY


Mr Dee

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

I definitely underestimated how good of a pick up that was by Ottawa signing Dionte Spencer this past offseason. That was a hell of a game by him

He caught a short pass at the beginning of the game and put a wicked spin move on a defender, at that point I realized he was just a step quicker than everyone else out there last night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at it, he caught the ball with one foot on the ground. Pivots, plants the other foot, gets blown up and loses the ball. If that's a catch on the sidelines and the same thing happens, but the ball goes out of bounds, that's ruled an incomplete pass every single time.

He didn't take a step, he didn't make a football move. Should've been ruled incomplete.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mike said:

I guess that's where we disagree. I don't think he took any steps.

personally I'm a little biased to the possession rules anyways, its just so cheesy when there's a big play and the ref says he didn't have control because he didn't "make a football move".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gotmilt said:

personally I'm a little biased to the possession rules anyways, its just so cheesy when there's a big play and the ref says he didn't have control because he didn't "make a football move".

I don't like the "football move" rule either. But in this case, I lean more towards pointing out that he didn't take a single step before getting blown up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mike said:

I don't like the "football move" rule either. But in this case, I lean more towards pointing out that he didn't take a single step before getting blown up.

He did though.  Just not after the pivot.  He caught the ball, took a step backwards, pivoted on that foot, took half a step and got blown up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mike said:

I don't like the "football move" rule either. But in this case, I lean more towards pointing out that he didn't take a single step before getting blown up.

Glad I'm not a ref but if it continues to be called this was I won't be complaining.

I believe it should be similar to hockey where the defenceman tosses you a sewer pass has to responsible for A. a turnover and B. Killing your teammate. Also forces players to be more aware of where they are on the field.

Edited by Gotmilt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Atomic said:

He did though.  Just not after the pivot.  He caught the ball, took a step backwards, pivoted on that foot, took half a step and got blown up.

I'm trying to imagine the footwork involved in what you're describing. Not only does it sound impossible, but I'm looking at the highlight right now and I can't say that I agree that is what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trying to look at it right now and lay it out.

Sinopoli secures the ball a few inches ahead of the 50 yard line, left foot on the ground, right foot in the air. Puts right foot down, pivots, left foot comes off the ground just before Singleton drills him. They're still inside the 51 yard line.

Not sure how that would constitute a catch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mike said:

Trying to look at it right now and lay it out.

Sinopoli secures the ball a few inches ahead of the 50 yard line, left foot on the ground, right foot in the air. Puts right foot down, pivots, left foot comes off the ground just before Singleton drills him. They're still inside the 51 yard line.

Not sure how that would constitute a catch.

He catches it, tucks it, plants his feet and pivots, I don't know how you can say that isn't a catch even if he didn't take a step.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mike said:

Trying to look at it right now and lay it out.

Sinopoli secures the ball a few inches ahead of the 50 yard line, left foot on the ground, right foot in the air. Puts right foot down, pivots, left foot comes off the ground just before Singleton drills him. They're still inside the 51 yard line.

Not sure how that would constitute a catch.

That's exactly what I said!!!  But I believe it constitutes a catch when he is able to plant and pivot and begin taking a step in the other direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Player makes a catch by the sidelines. Only gets 1 foot down. Called a catch, every time. Same should hold true on the field. Player makes a catch. Gets one foot down. It's a catch. If he then gets blown up and fumbles, it's a fumble.

Bigger question in my mind is how the heck was Harris' fumble for a TD, not called a fumble? Sure, his arm was moving forward, but the ball ended up being thrown behind him, behind the LOS, which is a lateral, which becomes a fumble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TBURGESS said:

Player makes a catch by the sidelines. Only gets 1 foot down. Called a catch, every time. Same should hold true on the field. Player makes a catch. Gets one foot down. It's a catch. If he then gets blown up and fumbles, it's a fumble.

Bigger question in my mind is how the heck was Harris' fumble for a TD, not called a fumble? Sure, his arm was moving forward, but the ball ended up being thrown behind him, behind the LOS, which is a lateral, which becomes a fumble.

Part 1: you're missing the second part of the equation, where you have to survive contact. If all you need to do is have one foot on the ground and possession of the ball for a millisecond for it to be ruled a catch, then there are a lot more catches in the CFL than what gets called.

Part 2: it's a different rule when there's contact, but I can't find the play to comment and I don't remember it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...