Threads / Key factor in saints Victory
« Older
Ok to all the Colts fans that I h...
This is just SAD!!!! Newer »
Coaching.
I ask........do you think Shaun Peyton out coached Jim Caldwell?
I think he had the upper hand in that game.
Going for 2 pointer
On Sides kick
Review of 2 pointer
Great use of timeouts
Your thoughts fans??????????
I ask........do you think Shaun Peyton out coached Jim Caldwell?
I think he had the upper hand in that game.
Going for 2 pointer
On Sides kick
Review of 2 pointer
Great use of timeouts
Your thoughts fans??????????
, OH
Going for 2- Easy call
On sides kick- Really hit the player right in the chest...if he wouldnt have touched it the ball prob wouldnt have went 10 yards
Review obvious as well.
Did they even use any timeouts in the second half?
I'll give him the coaching edge because he was able to stop Manning...but credit to the DC as well for that.
On sides kick- Really hit the player right in the chest...if he wouldnt have touched it the ball prob wouldnt have went 10 yards
Review obvious as well.
Did they even use any timeouts in the second half?
I'll give him the coaching edge because he was able to stop Manning...but credit to the DC as well for that.
yeah no doubt...but I think the overall apporach to the game plan was better than the colts. In fact I think the colts got lost a little bit in the game plan after they had to sit for so long in the second quarter....I balme the coach for that...they seem quite out of sinc....
The onside kick was a turning point, but nothing that couldn't be handled.
The 2 pointer, I don't think it was a good call.
I also strongly believe the Colts beat themselves for the most part.
Interceptions? Come on, not for Manning...
The 2 pointer, I don't think it was a good call.
I also strongly believe the Colts beat themselves for the most part.
Interceptions? Come on, not for Manning...
, PA
You're on crack. It was a great call. He clearly made it over the line with possession. The Colts player kicked the ball out of his hands after he already crossed the line.
Colts beat themselves? BS!! They simply got outplayed by the Saints.
Colts beat themselves? BS!! They simply got outplayed by the Saints.
As a respectable Colts fan, I have to defend them.
The Saints deserved to win, with their season and being the underdog.
Also: I do smoke crack, and I know a bullshit call when I see one.
The Saints deserved to win, with their season and being the underdog.
Also: I do smoke crack, and I know a bullshit call when I see one.
, NY
I know I'd lose too thats the sad thing. You find the best stuff out there. I saw that thing you posted in the weekly awards. Funny shit man. Porter came outta no where on that spear thingy.
LOL....I'm dieing here guit it....LOL......funny funny shit....my face is hurting I am laughing so freaking hard.....
Now now now Mr Cowboy....LOL...play nice....lord knows I been picking on them enough for all of us non colts fans...LOL
How is it a bullshit call when he clearly had possession as the ball crossed the goal line? Regardless of whether the Colts player kicked the ball from his hands or not having possession of the ball across the goal line results in a score.
The ball never touched the ground prior to possession so how was the call bad?
The ball never touched the ground prior to possession so how was the call bad?
Great call.......great play....great win.....how you doing man?...all dug out yet? Have to use those generators?
your kidding right...he had the ball over the end zone and it was a 2 point conversion...no doubts about it...
if a player catches the ball in the end zone and then the defender knocks it out of his hands ...is it still a catch?...No..... then how is that any different?...he didnt maintain possession...I disagree with the call
As soon as he had possession of the ball and it was across the goal line its a TD and anything after that is a moot point. It was not a bad call at all. It was quite obvious as a matter of fact.
so how is that any different than catching a pass in the end zone and the defender knocks it out of your hand?...you did have possession at one point so does that make it a touchdown?
If you have possession for a second or so then yeah its a TD...if he knocks it out immediately then obviously not b/c you literally never had it.
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 1 of the NFL Rule Book (page 51)
"If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact with an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete."
He didnt "maintain control of the ball after he touched the ground".
"If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact with an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete."
He didnt "maintain control of the ball after he touched the ground".
Yes he did...i have no clue what youre trying to argue...he went to the ground, bobbled the ball, and then regained control...as soon as he regained control it was a TD, the ball was kicked out of his hands after he regained that control.
if it is knocked out then you did not have possession. If you come down with the ball and in that act it is knocked out, and you had possession if only for the half step it is a TD.
In this case.....He crossed the endzone.... ball in hands.... making a football move and then it was kicked...the result is a TD.
In this case.....He crossed the endzone.... ball in hands.... making a football move and then it was kicked...the result is a TD.
If the player has completed the process of the catch a player can't come along seconds later and strip the ball away. Once possession has been established the moment the ball crosses the line the play is over.
He did maintain possession once he reestablished possession. Since the ball didn't touch the ground after the initial juggle once possession was established the ball crossing the plane was the end of the play and that was before the ball was kicked from his hands.
He did maintain possession once he reestablished possession. Since the ball didn't touch the ground after the initial juggle once possession was established the ball crossing the plane was the end of the play and that was before the ball was kicked from his hands.
This is the rule:.
A player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball inbounds. To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted or recovered, a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet completely on the ground inbounds or any other part of his body, other than his hands, on the ground inbounds. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, there is no possession. This rule applies to the field of play and in the end zone."
How else could you interpret "If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, there is no possession" ?
A player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball inbounds. To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted or recovered, a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet completely on the ground inbounds or any other part of his body, other than his hands, on the ground inbounds. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, there is no possession. This rule applies to the field of play and in the end zone."
How else could you interpret "If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, there is no possession" ?
What play were you watching? He had complete control of the ball, had body parts other than his hands touching the ground.
What are you searching for?
What are you searching for?
- Brackett's new deal by CF150
- What was the FIRST NFL game you attended? by RootMasterColt
- Donald Brown and his year in review with the Colts by NCPatsfan64
- Tim Tebow Superbowl Commercial Parody by djhaley
- Key Moments in the SB by Jeffl0726
- Indianapolis Colts President points finger at players. by BigTex
Related Articles
Related Polls
Related RootOffs
NFL Football Forum Categories
-
Top Nominees
-
Arizona Cardinals
-
Atlanta Falcons
-
Baltimore Ravens
-
Buffalo Bills
-
Carolina Panthers
-
Chicago Bears
-
Cincinnati Bengals
-
Cleveland Browns
-
Dallas Cowboys
-
Denver Broncos
-
Detroit Lions
-
Green Bay Packers
-
Houston Texans
-
Indianapolis Colts
-
Jacksonville Jaguars
-
Kansas City Chiefs
-
Miami Dolphins
-
Minnesota Vikings
-
New England Patriots
-
New Orleans Saints
-
New York Giants
-
New York Jets
-
NFL General
-
Oakland Raiders
-
Philadelphia Eagles
-
Pittsburgh Steelers
-
Playoffs
-
San Diego Chargers
-
San Francisco 49ers
-
Seattle Seahawks
-
St. Louis Rams
-
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
-
Tennessee Titans
-
Washington Redskins
