PDA

View Full Version : Referees: Santonio Holmes catch...



igor0190
01-19-2009, 01:20 AM
Was it just me or did that bring back memories of the Polamalu catch VS Indy that the refs blew? Trying to be completely unbiased I really thought it was a catch. He basically took two steps, put 1 hand down, and travelled 4.5 yards before he crossed the plane of the goaline with possession and then they called it incomplete? It should have been a catch AND a touchdown!

SOMEONE PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG?



GOING TO THE SUPERBOWL!

AZ_Steeler
01-19-2009, 01:27 AM
I'm on your side! That definitely looked like a catch to me regardless of what team I was rooting for.

I guess in the long run it didn't matter plus the Steelers got a gimme on the roughing the kicker called against the Ravens! So I guess we can't really complain too much.

BlitzburghRockCity
01-19-2009, 01:46 AM
They said that when he hit the ground he lost control of it which would make it incomplete however it looked like it crossed the plane jsut before it hit so that should have been a TD.

greennick
01-19-2009, 01:48 AM
There were a few **** calls all round.

Black@Gold Forever32
01-19-2009, 01:49 AM
They said that when he hit the ground he lost control of it which would make it incomplete however it looked like it crossed the plane jsut before it hit so that should have been a TD.

Ben really should have had well over 300 yards and 3 or more TD passes today........He played some great football out there tonight.....

blackngold29
01-19-2009, 02:05 AM
Here's my question: Tomlin was going to challenge the spot, he had the red flag out. If they would've taken his challenge of the ball spot first and said it was a TD could the Ravens then challenge the completion? Tomlin was challenging the spot, so they couldn't have said it was incomplete. It was goofy that they both pulled out the flag.

--- Added 1/19/2009 at 01:05 AM ---


They said that when he hit the ground he lost control of it which would make it incomplete however it looked like it crossed the plane jsut before it hit so that should have been a TD.

Is it not still the rule that the "Ground cannot cause the fumble"? He took atleast 2 steps with control of the ball. Fitzgerald had the same kind of play in the other game and nobody said anything, it was complete, hit the ground, came out, completion.

SteelFanInIL
01-19-2009, 02:10 AM
There were a few **** calls all round.

Yrp...I loved that "running into the kicker":lol:...but you know what , they took points off the board with that BS call on the Holmes catch....whatever , we're going to the Super Bowl!! Woohoo:tt02::tt02::tt02:

NYCsteelersfan
01-19-2009, 02:14 AM
Was it just me or did that bring back memories of the Polamalu catch VS Indy that the refs blew? Trying to be completely unbiased I really thought it was a catch. He basically took two steps, put 1 hand down, and travelled 4.5 yards before he crossed the plane of the goaline with possession and then they called it incomplete? It should have been a catch AND a touchdown!

SOMEONE PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG?



GOING TO THE SUPERBOWL!

I agree with you but then again I'm not a "rule book" expert.

What Holmes did, I compare to when a RB stretches for yardage and loses the ball, it's either rules a fumble or down by contact. Holmes had complete possesion and stretched out to get the ball across the goal line and that's when the ball popped loose after hitting the ground, which was definitely AFTER the ball had already crossed.

No doubt about it, the refs were making calls to favor the Ravens, only they didn't get out of hand and make it obvious like the ref in the Steelers/Colts game did in the '05 playoffs. People have definitely caught on some after the NBA was ousted bu the ref that got sent to jail. Plus the media has specifically targeted refs this year, which is rare, forcing the league to tone down the "bulls#$%".


I'm on your side! That definitely looked like a catch to me regardless of what team I was rooting for.

I guess in the long run it didn't matter plus the Steelers got a gimme on the roughing the kicker called against the Ravens! So I guess we can't really complain too much.

That was only fair after the BS pass interference call and the BS unecessary roughness call, meanwhile the Raven player blatantly baited him with hands to the face and nothing was called. It should've been a unsportsmanlike call on both teams.


Here's my question: Tomlin was going to challenge the spot, he had the red flag out. If they would've taken his challenge of the ball spot first and said it was a TD could the Ravens then challenge the completion? Tomlin was challenging the spot, so they couldn't have said it was incomplete. It was goofy that they both pulled out the flag.

If Tomlin won the challenge, then obviously it would've had to be a catch for it to be a TD which would make it being an incompletion impossible. What I wonder is whether or not Tomlin could've challenged whether or not the ball broke the plane before the ball came loose by hitting the floor.

SteelFanInIL
01-19-2009, 02:19 AM
...And let's not forget about the hit on Ben(roughing should have been called) that was ignored...and holding on J.H. ...but thats every game.

NYCsteelersfan
01-19-2009, 02:22 AM
...And let's not forget about the hit on Ben(roughing should have been called) that was ignored...

When Bart Scott hit him?

blackngold29
01-19-2009, 02:22 AM
...And let's not forget about the hit on Ben(roughing should have been called) that was ignored...

Absolutely. I hear Ravens fans complaining on other sites about the Roughing the kicker; and I agree that was a bad call, but the refs owed us four more to get even. Do I even have to say holding on Harrison? My dad suggested leaving a camera on him the whole game... we could call it the Hold cam.

SteelFanInIL
01-19-2009, 02:25 AM
When Bart Scott hit him?

The play he got sandwiched on after a pass... We saw him in the tunnel afterwards... I don't remember if it was Scott or not. Anyway my point is bad calls went back and forth...I don't want to hear any Raven fan talking excuses. LETS GO TO TAMPA !!!!!!!!

NYCsteelersfan
01-19-2009, 02:43 AM
There was one hit on him other than the sandwich sack that was definitely roughing the passer on a any other QB in the league. I think Scott made the hit.

HUNT4SEVEN
01-19-2009, 02:54 AM
The ref's stunk up the joint bad today:yesnod:, But remember u can cheat us, but u can't beat us.:tt02:

DIESELMAN
01-19-2009, 07:23 AM
The ref's stunk up the joint bad today:yesnod:, But remember u can cheat us, but u can't beat us.:tt02:
There ya go Bro!! :yellowthumb: The definition of a catch being a catch have gotten sketchier every year, as have the refs.

ToothAche
01-19-2009, 07:44 AM
I agree that should have been ruled a touchdown. Holmes caught the ball, made a "football move" and then crossed the goal line, then the ball came out after it hit the ground. Makes you wonder if this whole replay review thing is in place just to keep the points spreads a little closer.

NCSteeler
01-19-2009, 07:53 AM
The rule say when being tackled during a catch, the WR must maintain possession all the way , including when he is on the ground. By the time he fell he was not even in the grasp of the tackler and was obviously making a move for the goal line. yet he Refs are refs as usual this season

CNY_STEELER_FAN
01-19-2009, 08:27 AM
That sure looked like a touchdown to me. Holmes made a football move (extended towards the goal-line) and was being tackled as he made the move. That being said, it's nice to see Holmes start to be a threat in the passing game again.

Hello Super Bowl!!

SteelerNC
01-19-2009, 08:30 AM
refs suck no matter what

Biggest Fan
01-19-2009, 09:41 AM
It is amazing how one or Two plays can make for a season esp. when it is in the post season. You could say that they were the biggest plays in each of the games. You might even say he almost saved our season on his own. Maybe I'm pouring it on a little but those were some amazing plays.
PS we all wanted to killl Sweed after the DROP but he kept his head in the game and came up with the BLOCK, the BREAK UP and a first down. I'm not ready to give up on him.
CHEERS

igor0190
01-19-2009, 10:47 AM
The biggest thing about the catch is that he had possession of the ball when he crossed the goaline = TOUCHDOWN. Does not matter what happens after he crosses the goaline since he clearly had made the catch, tucked it, took 2 steps, put one hand on the ground, and leaped towards the endzone. I really wonder if the replay booth shows the ref the play ONLY in slow motion... b/c speed it up a bit and it's obvious imo. I mean he caught the ball at the 5 yard line for God sakes.... How far do you have to travel with the ball for it to be considered possession. And once again, since he crossed the plane of the goaline it should not matter that he fumbled the ball after.

I am really curious to see what the nfl network says about this...
To me it just seemed like an easy call.

Steel Trap86
01-19-2009, 01:25 PM
Absolutely. I hear Ravens fans complaining on other sites about the Roughing the kicker; and I agree that was a bad call, but the refs owed us four more to get even. Do I even have to say holding on Harrison? My dad suggested leaving a camera on him the whole game... we could call it the Hold cam.

Harrisson finally drew a Holding penalty, can't remember who was blocking him, but holding was called

NYCsteelersfan
01-19-2009, 02:28 PM
Makes you wonder if this whole replay review thing is in place just to keep the points spreads a little closer.

I think you might be onto something.


I mean he caught the ball at the 5 yard line for God sakes.... How far do you have to travel with the ball for it to be considered possession. And once again, since he crossed the plane of the goaline it should not matter that he fumbled the ball after.

My understanding as well unless there is some BS "tuck rule" they'll make up to back up the call.

steelers4life66
01-19-2009, 03:20 PM
Was it just me or did that bring back memories of the Polamalu catch VS Indy that the refs blew? Trying to be completely unbiased I really thought it was a catch. He basically took two steps, put 1 hand down, and travelled 4.5 yards before he crossed the plane of the goaline with possession and then they called it incomplete? It should have been a catch AND a touchdown!

SOMEONE PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG?



GOING TO THE SUPERBOWL!
Didn't look like a TD. But it was defiantly a catch.

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 03:32 PM
Didn't look like a TD. But it was defiantly a catch. No he dropped it, and it was the right call. You have to maintain possession of the ball when you hit the ground, and he didn't. It was a heads up challenge by the Ravens. The Troy INT against the Colts was different. He made a football move after the catch. Hence the letter of apology from the league to Troy and the Steelers after the game. There will be no such letter to Holmes...The rule is the same when you catch it and go out of bounds.

igor0190
01-19-2009, 03:38 PM
Taking 2 steps, putting one hand on the ground, leaping towards the endzone, and reaching with the ball does not constitute a "football move"??????

Danger DANJ
01-19-2009, 03:41 PM
I don't know the exact rules for whether it was really a catch or not, but I don't think it was a TD. When he hits the ground and the ball comes out, it is not across the goal line.
But, as far as I'm concerned he caught the ball and made a football move which means he has possession. So after that, if the ball comes out, it's a fumble... only the ground can't cause a fumble. Am I missing something here? Should have been 1st and goal on the 1.

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 03:43 PM
Taking 2 steps, putting one hand on the ground, leaping towards the endzone, and reaching with the ball does not constitute a "football move"??????
Does not matter if the ball comes out when you hit the round though. You can put your hand on the ground and your still not down. Once you are ruled down, and the balls comes out, thats how it is determined. Holmes did not maintain control of the ball once he hit the ground. He did not have complete control. I promise there will be no letters saying sorry or that. It was the right call. And its not the first time this has happened.

NYCsteelersfan
01-19-2009, 03:50 PM
Does not matter if the ball comes out when you hit the round though. You can put your hand on the ground and your still not down. Once you are ruled down, and the balls comes out, thats how it is determined. Holmes did not maintain control of the ball once he hit the ground. He did not have complete control. I promise there will be no letters saying sorry or that. It was the right call. And its not the first time this has happened.

ball broke the plane before the ground popped the ball loose. I've seen RB's do the same thing countless times.

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 04:08 PM
ball broke the plane before the ground popped the ball loose. I've seen RB's do the same thing countless times. No it didn't. It hit the ground and came out before it got to the line or we wouldn't be having this conversation.

steelers4life66
01-19-2009, 04:19 PM
No he dropped it, and it was the right call. You have to maintain possession of the ball when you hit the ground, and he didn't. It was a heads up challenge by the Ravens. The Troy INT against the Colts was different. He made a football move after the catch. Hence the letter of apology from the league to Troy and the Steelers after the game. There will be no such letter to Holmes...The rule is the same when you catch it and go out of bounds.
From what I saw. He caught the ball made two steps and reached out to try and put the ball across the goal line. He had control of the ball because he switched hands and tried to put across the goal line.

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 04:30 PM
From what I saw. He caught the ball made two steps and reached out to try and put the ball across the goal line. He had control of the ball because he switched hands and tried to put across the goal line. He tried putting it across the line after he picked it up and scooted forward. It was the right call. the ref's got it right. you have to maintain control of the ball once you hit the ground. He did not, and not to mention he hit the ground in front of the goal line, then crawled forward...

NYCsteelersfan
01-19-2009, 04:55 PM
No it didn't. It hit the ground and came out before it got to the line or we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Yes because the refs always make the right calls, I apologize.

DIESELMAN
01-19-2009, 04:59 PM
Harrisson finally drew a Holding penalty, can't remember who was blocking him, but holding was called
It was Gaither (#71) that drew the flag....finally :greengrin:

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 05:06 PM
Yes because the refs always make the right calls, I apologize.My dad said it was the right call, and he's the smartest person on the west coast. They went through it in great detail and the the Ref's got it right. You go looking for BS calls and you will have a shadow over the victory. The Steelers are bigger then bad calls. And dont get lippy with me. I'm always right and thats that...

steelers4life66
01-19-2009, 05:30 PM
My dad said it was the right call, and he's the smartest person on the west coast. They went through it in great detail and the the Ref's got it right. You go looking for BS calls and you will have a shadow over the victory. The Steelers are bigger then bad calls. And dont get lippy with me. I'm always right and thats that...
To each hes own. Your not going to convince me that wasn't a catch and I'm not going to convince you it was.:lol:

NYCsteelersfan
01-19-2009, 05:32 PM
My dad said it was the right call, and he's the smartest person on the west coast. They went through it in great detail and the the Ref's got it right. You go looking for BS calls and you will have a shadow over the victory. The Steelers are bigger then bad calls. And dont get lippy with me. I'm always right and thats that...

And thats that.

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 05:34 PM
To each hes own. Your not going to convince me that wasn't a catch and I'm not going to convince you it was.:lol: You wont convince me because it was not a catch. The Steelers are the real, "America's Team." Did you call in sick during SB XL???? If it was a catch they would have given to him. Thats Holmes were talking about. MR. touch down. .....Or do you think its some kind of make up call for what happened in the last game against the Ravens?

DIESELMAN
01-19-2009, 05:49 PM
My dad said it was the right call, and he's the smartest person on the west coast. They went through it in great detail and the the Ref's got it right. You go looking for BS calls and you will have a shadow over the victory. The Steelers are bigger then bad calls. And dont get lippy with me. I'm always right and thats that...
You and your dad huh? Thats nice, you might want to look at it "thoroughly" and in great detail again. :greengrin:


To each hes own. Your not going to convince me that wasn't a catch and I'm not going to convince you it was.:lol:
I'm with you, I think (which means in my opinion, I believe its a catch) it was a catch. I'm watching the game again to see what happened. At about 6:28 in the 1st Q, Holmes caught the ball on about the 4 yard line, flying through the air, while not being touched by a defender he took 2 steps before sliding across the goal line. As he was going across the goal line is when the ball came loose when he hit the ground. The ground cannot cause a fumble and he had possession of the ball after 2 steps, in my book thats a catch and a TD. No controversy about it, some of us think its a catch and a TD and others think otherwise.

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 05:56 PM
You and your dad huh? Thats nice, you might want to look at it "thoroughly" and in great detail again. :greengrin:


I'm with you, I think (which means in my opinion, I believe its a catch) it was a catch. I'm watching the game again to see what happened. At about 6:28 in the 1st Q, Holmes caught the ball on about the 4 yard line, flying through the air, while not being touched by a defender he took 2 steps before sliding across the goal line. As he was going across the goal line is when the ball came loose when he hit the ground. The ground cannot cause a fumble and he had possession of the ball after 2 steps, in my book thats a catch and a TD. No controversy about it, some of us think its a catch and a TD and others think otherwise.
They ruled it a catch on the field, then over turned it. He did not maintain control once he hit the ground. doesn't matter if he crossed the line or not. you have to maintain control once you hit the ground. Putting your hand down does not count as hitting the ground. Come on guys this is not the tuck rule, and this is not the first time you have seen this.

DIESELMAN
01-19-2009, 06:02 PM
They ruled it a catch on the field, then over turned it. He did not maintain control once he hit the ground. doesn't matter if he crossed the line or not. you have to maintain control once you hit the ground. Putting your hand down does not count as hitting the ground. Come on guys this is not the tuck rule, and this is not the first time you have seen this.
Hey, we're just stating our opinion on the play. We believe it was a catch and a TD no matter how the refs (who never make mistakes) called it. The ball didn't come out until he hit the ground while he was sliding across the goal line after he took 2 steps (considered a legal catch, usually). I'm not saying we got robbed and I'm not screaming bloody murder over the call, just sayin I believe the refs made a mistake.

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 06:09 PM
Hey, we're just stating our opinion on the play. We believe it was a catch and a TD no matter how the refs (who never make mistakes) called it. The ball didn't come out until he hit the ground while he was sliding across the goal line after he took 2 steps (considered a legal catch, usually). I'm not saying we got robbed and I'm not screaming bloody murder over the call, just sayin I believe the refs made a mistake.
I would be forced to agree with you if he didn't lose control of the ball once he hit the ground. Its not a made up rule. They call it all the time when guys go out of bounds. its the same thing at the goal line or the 50 yard line. you cant lose control of the ball once you hit the ground.

DIESELMAN
01-19-2009, 06:14 PM
I would be forced to agree with you if he didn't lose control of the ball once he hit the ground. Its not a made up rule. They call it all the time when guys go out of bounds. its the same thing at the goal line or the 50 yard line. you cant lose control of the ball once you hit the ground.
Soooooo, what happened to the "ground can't cause a fumble"? He established possession after he made his 2 steps, then he hit the ground as he was sliding across the goal line. I know its not a made up rule just trying to figure out which is it....1. the ground can't cause a fumble after establishing possession or 2. you have to maintain possession even after you hit the ground? see the 1st question :lol: He wasn't juggling the ball after he caught it, he had it cradled in his arm and as he hit the ground, the ball came out.

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 06:20 PM
Soooooo, what happened to the "ground can't cause a fumble"? He established possession after he made his 2 steps, then he hit the ground as he was sliding across the goal line. I know its not a made up rule just trying to figure out which is it....1. the ground can't cause a fumble after establishing possession or 2. you have to maintain possession even after you hit the ground? see the 1st question :lol: He wasn't juggling the ball after he caught it, he had it cradled in his arm and as he hit the ground, the ball came out. He didn't have complete control of the ball on the way down. 2 steps are not. He never contolled the ball.

DIESELMAN
01-19-2009, 06:31 PM
He didn't have complete control of the ball on the way down. 2 steps are not. He never contolled the ball.
Sorry have to call BS on that. He did have possession and control of the ball. He caught it, took 2-3 steps, which is a football move and dove for more yards. He clearly has possession as he slides across the goal line, where the ball comes out when he hits the ground. I know the NFL has a new rule where the WR has to maintain possession through the catch and to the ground but this is not the case. He had already made the catch, took steps to prove he made the catch and had possession and was going for more yards and the TD. AND He lost the ball as he was crossing the goal line, after he made the catch, after he took 2-3 steps and after he made the fotball move to justify possession. Whats the difference between that and a RB diving over a pile the ball crossing the plane of the goal, losing the ball and it being a TD?

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 06:35 PM
Sorry have to call BS on that. He did have possession and control of the ball. He caught it, took 2-3 steps, which is a football move and dove for more yards. He clearly has possession as he slides across the goal line, where the ball comes out when he hits the ground. I know the NFL has a new rule where the WR has to maintain possession through the catch and to the ground but this is not the case. He had already made the catch, took steps to prove he made the catch and had possession and was going for more yards and the TD. AND He lost the ball as he was crossing the goal line, after he made the catch, after he took 2-3 steps and after he made the fotball move to justify possession. Whats the difference between that and a RB diving over a pile the ball crossing the plane of the goal, losing the ball and it being a TD? I'm trying to U-tube it because I was not drunk, and i am the first to call BS when we get BS calls. Like I said my dad is the smartest person on the west coast, and after reviewing the play I could not argue with the call or him.

DIESELMAN
01-19-2009, 06:40 PM
I'm trying to U-tube it because I was not drunk, and i am the first to call BS when we get BS calls. Like I said my dad is the smartest person on the west coast, and after reviewing the play I could not argue with the call or him.
Yeah go back and watch that play dude, watch it real close. If anything he could've been ruled down on the 1 yard line. He took 2-3 steps which constitutes a football move which also makes him a runner not a WR anymore. All I can say is this debate is going on at other forums. If the refs are going to interpret a rule, they need to understand it better before they rule on a play.

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 06:46 PM
Yeah go back and watch that play dude, watch it real close. If anything he could've been ruled down on the 1 yard line. He took 2-3 steps which constitutes a football move which also makes him a runner not a WR anymore. All I can say is this debate is going on at other forums. If the refs are going to interpret a rule, they need to understand it better before they rule on a play. I cant find it. Trust me i would love to eat some crow right now. i would love to be able to bitch about another no call. I just felt like it was the right call on the field.

Aashton
01-19-2009, 06:48 PM
He took 2-3 steps which constitutes a football move which also makes him a runner not a WR anymore.
You're right, he did take 2-3 steps. However, I think he still should be classified as a WR. :lol:

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 06:51 PM
You're right, he did take 2-3 steps. However, I think he still should be classified as a WR. :lol:
so what are you saying waterboy? Was it a catch or not? dont jump in here covering your balls.

DIESELMAN
01-19-2009, 06:52 PM
Like I said earlier, I'm not pissed about it or screaming bloody murder, just wish they would know the rules better when they go to interpret them and be more consistent all the way around. To much BS from the refs this year for everyone....:evilshake:

Dean Denton
01-19-2009, 07:01 PM
Like I said earlier, I'm not pissed about it or screaming bloody murder, just wish they would know the rules better when they go to interpret them and be more consistent all the way around. To much BS from the refs this year for everyone....:evilshake: Well if its the wrong call we all have the right to be pissed. I think had we lost it would have been different. Sweed might be in a world of pain right now too...

Roadkill
01-19-2009, 09:20 PM
there were alot of B.S. calls indeed

igor0190
01-19-2009, 11:25 PM
He took TWO steps and put ONE hand down in an attempt to dive for the goaline. If he did not have control of the ball let me ask you this... why would he have used his hand to stay on his feet by putting it on the ground and not put a second hand on the ball. If he was juggling the ball he would not have put that hand on the ground. It seems pretty clear cut to me.


Not that it matters, we won the game... but at the time in the game I was furious that they didn't call it a catch and I would love to be proven right. I believe Dean and his Dad are wrong on this one.

--- Added 1/19/2009 at 10:25 PM ---

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/santonio-holmes-dropped-td-pass-in-afc-championship/3777006487

CATCHES BALL, PUSHES OFF LEFT FOOT, STEPS WITH RIGHT FOOT, PUTS LEFT HAND DOWN AND PUSHES WITH RIGHT FOOT IN ATTEMPT TO GET TO ENDZONE.
He does all this and does not juggle the ball. Ball comes out after he crosses the plane. whereas he clearly already had possession of the ball. He travelled 4 yards with it for god sakes.

BlacknGold Bleeder
01-19-2009, 11:35 PM
He caught the ball took two steps, put hand down and stretched for end zone. When the ball hit the ground he had already broken the plane of the goal line, end of play.

It don't matter because we won the game but it would be nice to get some consistency on the rules! There was no irrefutable evidence to overturn that call.