Fleener's "no TD" catch...can anyone explain? (1 Viewer)

Deltabull

Pro-Bowler
Joined
Aug 30, 2001
Messages
990
Reaction score
331
Age
70
Offline
I can't understand why the call was reversed. He clearly had possession of the ball before he went out of bounds and seemed to "maintain" that control until, after clearly out of bounds, the defender attempted to punch the ball out but Fleener managed to hold on and the ball never touched the ground. Was this just another case of "Commissioner and his cronies" screw the Saints again or was the call legit?
 
I can't understand why the call was reversed. He clearly had possession of the ball before he went out of bounds and seemed to "maintain" that control until, after clearly out of bounds, the defender attempted to punch the ball out but Fleener managed to hold on and the ball never touched the ground. Was this just another case of "Commissioner and his cronies" screw the Saints again or was the call legit?

Thank you for asking this question. I wondered the same thing. I had to watch the game with no sound. Did Mike Periera give an explanation? Anyway my though when that happened was..."here we go again".
 
In simple football terms that is a TD. According to current rules for "going to the ground" it is not a TD. It's not your father's NFL anymore.
 
The Falcons need to generate excitement for next season due to the opening of "The Sphincter." They have to fill seats. The league is all about generating revenue. If they have to use replay to influence a game they can.
 
In simple football terms that is a TD. According to current rules for "going to the ground" it is not a TD. It's not your father's NFL anymore.

Let me ask you this: If that had been in the field of play, and not the end zone would it have been ruled a completed pass? Based on your response, I am assuming it would. And if that is the case, it's just wrong how the NFL has messed with the rules...IMO
 
Let me ask you this: If that had been in the field of play, and not the end zone would it have been ruled a completed pass? Based on your response, I am assuming it would. And if that is the case, it's just wrong how the NFL has messed with the rules...IMO

Yes it would have.
 
The catch rules get silly and depend on what you're doing and where you are.

Basically, you have to have possession, get either two feet in, or a knee/elbow/butt down, and if you're falling to the turf you have to maintain possession. When that ball bobbled a little, while falling out of bounds, I guess that counted as not a catch anymore.

Now if he caught it at the 1 yard line, turned and broke the plane of the goal line, and fell out of bound, and bobbled it.. I believe that would be a TD.
 
stupid really, that should be a catch in the NFL, change whatever rule gets in the way of common sense, NO WANDER WHY RATINGS ARE DOWN
 
I can explain it.

It was a garbage ruling and a terrible call. It happens all of the time and in every single game the NFL plays. We just ended up on the wrong side of almost all of the bad calls in our games this year.

Remember back in '09 when we played the Dolphins? We were down and ended up coming back and winning it, but there was a pick 6 by Sharper that helped us turn the tide and get back all the momentum.

I remember clearly seeing Sharper fumble before the ball broke the plane and it went thru the end zone out of bounds. The refs reviewed it, and the call on the field stood. It was a garbage call but it helped us, so we didn't hear much more about it.

We've been on the Wrong side of those lately so it hurts much more
 
Does anyone else get the sense that they delay the infield call until Pereria (or whomever) gets to weigh in
And then died he get the determination fed to him before hand?
 
Let me ask you this: If that had been in the field of play, and not the end zone would it have been ruled a completed pass? Based on your response, I am assuming it would. And if that is the case, it's just wrong how the NFL has messed with the rules...IMO

I agree. In the field of play it is a completion because the ball never touches the ground. And I agree that the rules are now so convoluted that it makes football hard to watch.

In previous years you barely had to have possession in the end one for it to be a TD, which I thought was wrong, but now it's ridiculous. Fleener had 3 steps and a knee with possession and in bounds which the eyes and common sense tell you is a TD. But that's not what the NFL is about.
 
the only way I can understand it is if the ball ended up on the ground but it didn't. It never left his possession therefore it was a possession.

It was either a horrible call or a good call under a bad rule.

Had we gotten that TD, and the 2 pt conversions, it's a different game.
 
On the other hand, if you hold on to the ball, which we (mostly Fleener) have such a hard time doing, then it is not an issue. Fleener could have controlled the ball and it would have been a TD.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom