Holmes Amazing TD

by SteelerBuddha on Jan 20, 2009 11:31 PM EST Comment 23 comments

No I am not talking about the beautiful 65 yard catch and run that Holmes had in the second quarter. I am talking about the 40 yard catch and dive in to the endzone that was ruled a catch on the 1 yard line and then for reasons not completely clear to anyone familiar with the game of footbal was ruled an incomplete pass.

Ulitmately it didn't make a difference because the Steelers dominated the Ravens. But after reading the great comments in this fanpost, I thought it was worth reviewing the film to see if there was any proof one way or another.

Before I show the slides, BadMafala defines the rules for us as follows:

I believe the rule is if a WR goes to the ground as a part of making the catch (which Holmes probably did, even though he was making a football move by stretching out), he has to maintain possession through the ground (which Holmes did not). If that’s the rule, the rule’s stupid in this case, but it may have been the right call.

I looked to see if I could find a copy of the rule book, but I could not.

If anyone can, it would be great if they could post the rules for a catch and for a touchdown on here.

Personally, after looking at the stills, I believe that Holmes made a catch, got control, took two steps, switched the ball to one hand and then dove for the endzone. If this is the case - as I think the photos show, then its not clear how this could be ruled anything but a catch.

The Proof

From Drop Box

Am I crazy or does he not only have the ball but he trying to break a tackle

From Drop Box

OK - can't break it - gotta try to go for the endzone. Also notice that Tone switches the ball into one hand. He doesn't bobble it or struggle for control, he tucks it firmly in one hand so he can dive.

From Drop Box

Um, Clearly still has possession. The knee has not touched.

From Drop Box

Okay this is just insane, Tone has launched himself in the air with full possession of thet ball, hovering about three inches off the ground.

Is this guy amazing or what?

From Drop Box

OK - maybe this isn't a touchdown, but:

1. He still isn't touching the ground here - the ball may just be making contact

2. The ball sure looks close to the breaking the plane

3. This is an amazingly athletic play

4. There is no way you can say he did not catch this ball, get two feet down and then make a move that would make superman proud.

5. This is one of the most athletic plays of the year. Lame call refs. Lame call.

From Drop Box

Wow!

0 recs | Comment 23 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I agree with everything

except the TD, I think it’s like inches away. This reminds me of the playoff game with SD when the Wookiee slammed Rivers to the ground. I thought that was a safety but it was like an inch away. Same type of situation here except the fact this was for a TD and not a safety.

by paulamalu on Jan 20, 2009 11:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

Probably right, but soooooooo close…. definitely not the 1 yard line.

by SteelerBuddha on Jan 21, 2009 12:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Next time

Dive for the end zone but keep both hands on the ball. I didn’t like the call, but I also understand why they ruled it the way they did. Unless you take a couple steps with complete control, which Holmes didn’t get the chance to do here, they are always going to consider it in the act of the catch, and in that instance you have to maintain control all the way through including when you hit the ground.

I really hate seeing guys reach across with the ball unless it is 4th down. Keep the ball close to your body and don’t let it get knocked out.

by worldtrip on Jan 21, 2009 12:03 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

disagree

if you watch the film it is abundantly clear that holmes did in fact take two steps with posession of the ball. this is the thing that i am so frustrated about (well, not so much now—i’ve cooled off). the rule for catches and holding onto a ball that hits the ground is only applicable if a player is not able to show possession while running with the ball. so if holmes had just dove and caught the ball in the air and then fell at the one yard line like that, i would agree that, by the rules, it should be considered incomplete. HOWEVER that is not what happened. tone caught the ball and took two steps towards the endzone, evading a tackle and then jumping toward the goal line. at this point it is no longer about the reception. he becomes a ball carrier. and the rule that applies in this case is that a ball carrier with possession of the football is ruled to be down by contact if in the act of being tackled the ball, while still in the carrier’s possession, hits the ground and comes loose.

someone correct me if i’m wrong, but if willie parker is carrying the ball and gets tripped up at the 20 yard line and dives forward to the 19, stretches the ball out to get a first down and then, when the ball hits the ground, it pops out of his possession, the ball is just placed right where the ball was when his knee touched. no? am i wrong?

that’s how i think this play should have been ruled. clearly a catch because he had two feet down with possession and took two steps toward the endzone. nfl rules infuriate me sometimes because they remind me of levitical law. rules should be there to help you, not make things so bloody confusing.

...die trying
http://www.agentorangerecords.blogspot.com

by agentorange on Jan 21, 2009 6:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

tomlin agrees with me

you can read what he thinks about it here

...die trying
http://www.agentorangerecords.blogspot.com

by agentorange on Jan 21, 2009 7:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

this speaks volumes

If Tomlin of all people is criticizing officiating, I don’t take that with a grain of salt.

by PSUMBBtrumpet on Jan 21, 2009 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Is this the only time he has not answered a question about officiating with “I don’t comment on officiating. It is what it is.”

by steelguy99 on Jan 21, 2009 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Here is the qoute

Tomlin did not agree with the call that overturned Santonio Holmes’ touchdown reception against Baltimore. Referee Bill Carollo ruled Holmes did not complete the play before he fumbled when he hit the ground. To complete a play, a receiver must make what is described as a “football move.”

“They said it was an incomplete pass,” Tomlin said. "They said that he didn’t establish a football move and that as he gained possession of the football he was in the process of going to the ground and, when that occurs, he has to maintain possession of the ball through contact with the ground.

“So the side step that he had after he caught the ball was not believed to be a football move.”

by SteelerBuddha on Jan 21, 2009 1:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It’s a very slick way of saying “You guys suck”.

by steelguy99 on Jan 21, 2009 2:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The rule

The reason the official called it that way was because the rule says if a receiver goes to the ground as a result of making the catch, he has to maintain possession of the ball through the ground. It’s stupid that this play is considered a non-catch based on that rule, but it’s probably the correct call. Holmes clearly would have made the catch if he was already in the end zone, but in trying to get that other yard he loses the ball and the catch.

charity standing orders

by BadMaafala on Jan 21, 2009 9:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

If this is the rule, he did not go to the grounds “as a result of making the catch.” Catch was made after two steps. Period. He went to the ground, but it was in an effort to get a TD. Not in an effort to make the catch. Still the wrong call.

by CarlWeathersMustache on Jan 21, 2009 11:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He went the ground as a result of tackle

See all the pictures above. He has clear possession. He has a guy wrapped around his feet. He breaks the tackle, does a superman into the endzone and after flying about three four yards, finally hits the ground. Its an absurd call.

by SteelerBuddha on Jan 21, 2009 12:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

hmm

I’d have to look at the video again.

charity standing orders

by BadMaafala on Jan 21, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Watch the video

But also look at the stills above. He is clearly making a move – I would say – one heck of a move. Actually, I would say he made two moves – the first is the step to try to break the tackle and the second is the superman extension for the goal line. He keeps full control of the ball during both those moves – and actually switches it into one hand and then reaches that hand out. I am not sure what more you could want from the guy to do in terms of football moves.

by SteelerBuddha on Jan 21, 2009 1:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Football moves are one thing – and I agree that he made at least one football move – but if he was going down as a result of the catch+contact, the football move doesn’t matter. Clearly he was going down – if he wasn’t, he would have just kept running into the EZ. Like I said, it’s a stupid rule, but I still think they made the correct call.

charity standing orders

by BadMaafala on Jan 21, 2009 2:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

spirit of the rule

I think that the rule clearly violated the spirit of the rule. Think about it. If Holmes makes a clear catch, and then in breaking a tackle dives forward to try to get the first down, maintains clear possession of the ball during his dive and the ground causes the ball to come loose, then its a catch.
If on the other hand he jumps for the ball on the way down he has full possession but as he hits the ground the ball comes loose – then its not a catch.

My sense is that the play we saw was the first play. It happened fast, but he made two big moves – one is trying to outrun the tackle and two was the incredible dive. He wasn’t laying out to make the catch. He made the catch took two steps and then dove.

Anyway, I wouldn’t spill so much ink on it, except that I though he got penalized for making a jaw-dropping play.

by SteelerBuddha on Jan 21, 2009 2:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I completely agree

As I said earlier, the rule’s stupid in this case. Common sense says it’s a catch and a great play. However, the NFL is trying to make it’s rules well defined and fair – making a sharp line between what is a catch and what isn’t – so referees don’t have to use biased or random “common sense” in situations even more abiguous than this one that can change the outcome of games (e.g. the force out rule). Unfortunately, in an effort to make the rule well defined, they have made it inaccurate as to what we would instinctively say is a catch or not a catch in this case. To quote Bertrand Russell, “Everything is vague to a degree you do not realize till you have tried to make it precise. " Basically, it’s hard to make a simple, clear, and accurate definition of something like "what a catch is”.

The NFL has obviously sacrificed accuracy for precision and simplicity in this case, but I can’t really blame them. The rule is the rule, and I think that play gets overturned almost every time. Holmes has just as much access to the rulebook as the officials do, so he should know what constitutes a catch and when not to be a jackass with the ball. He has a long history of ball security issues and diving unnecessarily for TD’s etc, which is a bigger problem than anything the officials did, if you ask me. Even if the rule goes against common sense in a few outlying cases, at least it is clear and fairly easy to consistenly enforce. Unlike, say, holding.

charity standing orders

by BadMaafala on Jan 21, 2009 5:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I see your point but ...

Bad I understand what you’re saying about contact ultimately causing Santonio to go down, but there still has to be a separation of physical acts. By your reasoning (and the apparent reasoning of the refs in this case), then a guy who is knocked off balance when he makes a catch, and retains possession for 10 stumbling yards before making a face plant on the turf or going out of bounds, must still not drop the ball upon contact with the ground. There is no way that kind of play would be ruled incomplete. It would be ruled a catch where he went out of bounds or whatever point in the field of play he (or the ball in his possession) touched the ground.

by steeler.lifer on Jan 21, 2009 3:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

3 hands

he used 1 hand to stay in the air, so in order to have two he would have had to have grown a third hand and if that were to be the case then we need to check what these guys are drinking

by tannofsteel84 on Jan 21, 2009 12:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

geeze he's like 4 yards out when the ball gets to him

how could he not have possession after 4 yards of running with it?

they did their best to screw us over and it didn’t work this time. Now the Ravens can shut the hell up about Tone on the goal line. Actually they can shut up about everything and go home where they belong.

"It was an attrition football game and you know we like that."

by showtime on Jan 21, 2009 7:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

+1

on the last part – they can just shut up about everything, 3 strikes and you’re out!!

by 703Steeler on Jan 21, 2009 3:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

im home watching tv like a good beaten rat bird. i have 0 gripes about this year. steelers 3 wins ravens a big fat 0. they couldn’t even give me 1 flippin victory against a team we plan for 365 days a year. our rep gets in the way of actually beating good teams consistantly. we, however, had 1 receiver. a rookie qb. a FB at HB. 50 year old willie anderson on the blind side. 3 kids in Nakamura, Leonhard and Zibby running around in the D backfield blah blah blah…. i was happy with getting to the Wild Card game. everything else was gravy. i’m just not certain we can get back to the second round. NE and Colts will be back next year and that could mean a lot of couch sitting for me. the only thing that will keep ben from the AFC North title is injury. we need a star off season for sure.

by raven on Jan 21, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

two things

1 I was just happy to see the Steelers get to the playoffs, especially with the Ravens one game behind us all year long.

2 At dinner tonight I found out my uncle is a ravens and eagles fan. Rest of family is all Black and Gold. I razzed him for awhile (he could have had SB nirvana) but I did compliment Flacco because he was a good rookie and I believe he will be a problem in the future. I also enjoyed reminding him that there’s no way the ravens keep all three marquee linebackers next year.

"It was an attrition football game and you know we like that."

by showtime on Jan 21, 2009 9:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs