Santonio Holmes disallowed TD in AFC champ game

[zulater]

My computer skills are lacking. So I have a request to the board. If anyone has the 2008 AFC Championship game between the Steelers and Ravens taped, DVR'd or have the box DVD set of Road to SB XLIII and you have the computer skills to cut a play from that game and link a particular play to this board, I ask if you could do so. The play I want to see is in the first quarter, about 6.33 mark. First and 10 from Ravens 24, Ben throws to Santonio Holmes who takes it to the 1 yard line. Ruled a completion on the field. Holmes takes at least 2 full strides with full possession of the ball, rolls into the end zone, think he did two full body rotations on the ground, on the 2nd rotation, possibly the 3rd the balls comes out, goes into the end zone (if memory serves me correct) with a clear recovery by the Steelers. Harbaugh challenges. I remember at the time thinking it was a ridiculous challenge, Ravens somehow wins the challenge. Steelers end up settling for a fg 3 plays later. Score is 6-0 as opposed to 10-0 as a result.

So hopefully by this point you get my relevance. People are acting like the Dez Bryant play was the first time this sort of call has taken place. If memory serves me correctly Santonio was robbed to at least the same degree that Bryant was. But for the life of me I can't find a cut up of that play to prove that this is no new thing.

Thanks if anyone can give me some help here.

[86WARD]

So it's better to just give less effort and wait to be touched down.

I do kind of remember that. Someone could probably just record it with an iPhone and post it to Vine or something to make it easier?

I could do it later tonight...but not near my boxset or TV to do it.

[vader29]

Just watched it, it was ruled a catch just short of the goal line, Tomlin threw his challenge flag but Harbaugh also threw his challenge flag and after replay they ruled it not a catch. I'll try to make an animated gif out of it.

[vader29]

Uploaded a couple of clips to tinypic:

Video 1 (http://tinypic.com/r/2hg7ho6/8)

Video 2 (http://tinypic.com/r/2r3v145/8)

[zulater]

Uploaded a couple of clips to tinypic:

Video 1 (http://tinypic.com/r/2hg7ho6/8)

Video 2 (http://tinypic.com/r/2r3v145/8)

Thanks. The second one really shows it. Catches the ball. Has full control. Takes three full steps with the ball in complete control. Goes to the ground and the ball dislodges only then.

So this begs the question, how many steps constitute a catch? Hell by the NFL standards you could probably go goal line to goal line with the ball, and if it slips out its an incompletion, as if the 98 yards you just traveld with the ball didn't count. :lol:

[Dwinsgames]

rule used to state ....

demonstrate control of the football with 2 feet down and make a football move ( whatever the hell that move is people must not be doing it /shrug ) sarcasm now back off ...

where as a RB only has to break the plane of the goal line with possession if he fumbles at any point after he breaks the plane is inconsequential because the play ends at the goal line passes are not like that for whatever reason

[Count Steeler]

A catch is not a catch until the catch is a catch.

[steelreserve]

I had no doubt they'd made a similar ruling before. They were both TD catches. Lawyerball at its finest.

[Psycho Ward 86]

The 'completing the process of the catch' rule wasn't in place back then. That rule was only in place starting a couple years ago because of Calvin Johnson's game winning "TD" against the bears.

I don't understand why people are having such a hard time wrapping their head around Dez Bryant's non catch. IT WAS NOT A CATCH. Read the rules. I believe Pereira agreed with such an assessment as well.

[steelreserve]

The 'completing the process of the catch' rule wasn't in place back then. That rule was only in place starting a couple years ago because of Calvin Johnson's game winning "TD" against the bears.

I don't understand why people are having such a hard time wrapping their head around Dez Bryant's non catch. IT WAS NOT A CATCH. Read the rules. I believe Pereira agreed with such an assessment as well.

It was in place since at least 2005, since that's what they used to overrule Troy's interception against the Colts in the playoffs because he "didn't complete a football move."

In any case, if the rule says any of those are not a catch, the problem is the rule. The rule can be wrong too, you know.

[tube517]

I thought this was the Bert Emmanuel rule from the 1999 NFC Championship game? Or am I confusing these rules?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk

[zulater]

The 'completing the process of the catch' rule wasn't in place back then. That rule was only in place starting a couple years ago because of Calvin Johnson's game winning "TD" against the bears.

I don't understand why people are having such a hard time wrapping their head around Dez Bryant's non catch. IT WAS NOT A CATCH. Read the rules. I believe Pereira agreed with such an assessment as well.

I knew in real time when it happened that it would probably be overturned. I'm familiar with the rule enough that I knew chances were good that it would be overturned on a challenge as soon as the play happened. (unlike Buck and Aikman who were oblivious to the possibility right up until McCarthy threw the challenge flag) My point was two fold. I've seen this rule enforced several times over the course of this past season. But until it happens to the Cowboys it's as if it never happened between then and since the Calvin Johnson game. Second. Understanding the rule ( to some extent) is one thing. Thinking the rule is correct is another thing entirely.To me it's insane. If you catch the ball inbounds and take it to the ground with control, why should it be any different than how you would interpret a fumble on a running play?

[Psycho Ward 86]

I knew in real time when it happened that it would probably be overturned. I'm familiar with the rule enough that I knew chances were good that it would be overturned on a challenge as soon as the play happened. (unlike Buck and Aikman who were oblivious to the possibility right up until McCarthy threw the challenge flag) My point was two fold. I've seen this rule enforced several times over the course of this past season. But until it happens to the Cowboys it's as if it never happened between then and since the Calvin Johnson game. Second. Understanding the rule ( to some extent) is one thing. Thinking the rule is correct is another thing entirely.To me it's insane. If you catch the ball inbounds and take it to the ground with control, why should it be any different than how you would interpret a fumble on a running play?

he didnt hold on for the entire process of contacting the ground. he did NOT take it to the ground with control. incomplete.

Dean Blandino, VP of officiating also explained this. It was a pretty easy call on replay.

[zulater]

he didnt hold on for the entire process of contacting the ground. he did NOT take it to the ground with control. incomplete.

Dean Blandino, VP of officiating also explained this. It was a pretty easy call on replay.

Duh! We know all that. But they caught the ball, had clear control (Dez and Holmes) both took 3 steps, balls not moving, then they go to the ground, extend the ball out and it comes loose.

So tell me how many steps are the magic number? If a receiver catches the ball at the 15 yard line runs 6-7 steps and then fumbles after being hit at the 1, is it a fumble or an incompletion? So where's the magic number? Is it 4 steps? 5? I mean watch the replays again. Both establish clear control of the pass, both take 3 steps with undisputed full control of the ball. Both intentionally extend the ball out towards the goal line. The ball comes dislodged upon contact with the ground. So tell me, if the guy catches the ball at hos own 1 runs it down the field to the other 1, extends the ball out and it comes out on contact with the ground it's obviously incomplete according to you, Dean, and the league? No. So again what's the magic number of steps? :doh:

[Psycho Ward 86]

Duh! We know all that. But they caught the ball, had clear control (Dez and Holmes) both took 3 steps, balls not moving, then they go to the ground, extend the ball out and it comes loose.

So tell me how many steps are the magic number? If a receiver catches the ball at the 15 yard line runs 6-7 steps and then fumbles after being hit at the 1, is it a fumble or an incompletion? So where's the magic number? Is it 4 steps? 5? I mean watch the replays again. Both establish clear control of the pass, both take 3 steps with undisputed full control of the ball. Both intentionally extend the ball out towards the goal line. The ball comes dislodged upon contact with the ground. So tell me, if the guy catches the ball at hos own 1 runs it down the field to the other 1, extends the ball out and it comes out on contact with the ground it's obviously incomplete according to you, Dean, and the league? No. So again what's the magic number of steps? :doh:

you're not reading my post correctly. its not even about the number of steps, its about holding on for the entire process of contacting the ground. he didn't take it to the ground with control so its not a catch.

im surprised that a lot of steeler fans are in support of the cowboys of all teams on this one. seemed like we used to be in favor of rules that favor the defense.

EDIT: Ah i think i see where some of the misunderstanding is coming from. I'm infering that this rule applies to the Dez Bryant non-catch only. Not Santonio's catch. I'm pretty sure this rule wasn't in place at the time so it was catch back then.

[zulater]

No it wasn't catch back then. It was ruled a catch on the field. Ironically both Tomlin and Harbaugh challenged the play. Tomlin challenged because as he saw it as Santonio was never touched by a defender, so in his mind when Holmes regained control of the ball in the end zone he was thinking it should be ruled a TD. (the refs ruled completion, down at the 1) Harbitch challenged that it was a completed pass. And won. So the rule (stupid as it is and was) was in effect back then.

As far as the Cowboys go. I was delirious that they lost. I was even happier that a controversial game shaping call went against them. Particularly in light of the screwing the Lions took from the refs the week before. And of course unlike the calls that ended the Lions season the Dez Bryant call was in fact ruled correctly in accordance with the rules. A rule that have been consistently enforced by the league for years. So yes their complaint was hollow. And I have enjoyed their pissing and moaning about it ever since.

But that doesn't mean I think the rule in place is worth a damn.I think it's a stupid rule and should be changed as soon as possible. Now the chances are no greater that the Steelers could be aided by that rule as to be hindered by it in the future. But that's not the point. To me if you catch the ball anywhere in the field of play and have firm control of the ball, once you've established two feet inbounds it should be a completion from that point on. If the ball comes out aftewards it should either be a fumble or dead play if the runner was down by contact when the ball came out.

[Psycho Ward 86]

No it wasn't catch back then. It was ruled a catch on the field. Ironically both Tomlin and Harbaugh challenged the play. Tomlin challenged because as he saw it as Santonio was never touched by a defender, so in his mind when Holmes regained control of the ball in the end zone he was thinking it should be ruled a TD. (the refs ruled completion, down at the 1) Harbitch challenged that it was a completed pass. And won. So the rule (stupid as it is and was) was in effect back then.

As far as the Cowboys go. I was delirious that they lost. I was even happier that a controversial game shaping call went against them. Particularly in light of the screwing the Lions took from the refs the week before. And of course unlike the calls that ended the Lions season the Dez Bryant call was in fact ruled correctly in accordance with the rules. A rule that have been consistently enforced by the league for years. So yes their complaint was hollow. And I have enjoyed their pissing and moaning about it ever since.

But that doesn't mean I think the rule in place is worth a damn.I think it's a stupid rule and should be changed as soon as possible. Now the chances are no greater that the Steelers could be aided by that rule as to be hindered by it in the future. But that's not the point. To me if you catch the ball anywhere in the field of play and have firm control of the ball, once you've established two feet inbounds it should be a completion from that point on. If the ball comes out aftewards it should either be a fumble or dead play if the runner was down by contact when the ball came out.

no it wasnt. the fact that santonio was rewarded the catch at all confirms that. it has nothing to do with regaining control. with the rule that is currently in place, you have not caught the ball if you lose control of it through the process of the catch at all. i think a lot of people make it out to be as if you can lose the ball at all and not have a catch count, and thats just not true at all.

just my opinion but i dont see whats so strange about the rule. prevents some of these ridiculous premature catch/TD catch celebrations. i do recall that they are quite hated by our fanbase since the Santonio Holmes days