Time for a new rule!

Discussion in 'NFL Forum' started by JoeBear, Nov 19, 2013.

  1. JoeBear

    JoeBear Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2013
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +41 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    51ß
    Please Register or Log in to Remove this Advertisement!
    We have had the "tuck rule" (OK to fumble if you were only faking rule); The "ball moved" (or the control the ball to ground, or up to 10 minutes after catch) rule. Rules that were meant to cover up a bad call by a dumb official.

    Now it is time for the "Ok to commit pass interference if we think that the receiver might not have caught it anyway" (besides we want to go home) rule.
     
    #1
  2. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka
    DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    23,072
    Likes Received:
    3,339
    Ratings:
    +4,052 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    2,305ß
    For as many rules have gone towards the O's favor, I actually like this one. No penalty on the opposite side of the field should effect a play that went on in the opposite side.

    I liked the call. Gronk, for as bad of a man as he is, is not catching a ball that was thrown into a DB's chest who is 3 ft in front of him and has his body blocking Gronk out.
     
    #2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. The Benjamin

    The Benjamin George Halas
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    47,843
    Likes Received:
    2,197
    Ratings:
    +2,608 / 7 / -9
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,381ß
    Isn't that already a rule? It's not pass interference if the pass is deemed uncatchable?
     
    #3
    • Like Like x 1
  4. DavidL

    DavidL Pro-Bowler
    SuperFan

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2013
    Messages:
    3,764
    Likes Received:
    654
    Ratings:
    +775 / 7 / -26
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,340ß
    I want the "Calvin Johnson rule" revoked. Back in the 'old days", if you catch the ball with both feet in-bounds and on the ground, that is ruled a catch. I also want to bring back the force-out rule on sideline catches. Finally, I want the refs to enforce the pick-rule stricter (this is the NFL,not the NBA).
     
    #4
  5. The Benjamin

    The Benjamin George Halas
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    47,843
    Likes Received:
    2,197
    Ratings:
    +2,608 / 7 / -9
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,381ß
    The CJ rules is the right rule
     
    #5
  6. DavidL

    DavidL Pro-Bowler
    SuperFan

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2013
    Messages:
    3,764
    Likes Received:
    654
    Ratings:
    +775 / 7 / -26
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,340ß
    It's the rule, but it's not right. Under the old rules that we had for about 50 years, the Jeffrey catch was a TD and the Bears win the game.
     
    #6
  7. The Benjamin

    The Benjamin George Halas
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    47,843
    Likes Received:
    2,197
    Ratings:
    +2,608 / 7 / -9
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,381ß
    I will give you the Jeffery catch, I hate the shove out rule, but the CJ rule is the proper rule. It is the right call. CJ got screwed, thankfully in the Bears favor. If the old board were still around you would see old posts saying the same thing. CJ got screwed, but we will take it because it won us the game.
     
    #7
  8. The Benjamin

    The Benjamin George Halas
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    47,843
    Likes Received:
    2,197
    Ratings:
    +2,608 / 7 / -9
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,381ß
    The rule is the rule. We may not like it, but you MUST have control of the ball in order for it to count as a catch
     
    #8
  9. DavidL

    DavidL Pro-Bowler
    SuperFan

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2013
    Messages:
    3,764
    Likes Received:
    654
    Ratings:
    +775 / 7 / -26
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,340ß
    Your misstated the rule. Look at the replay. Jeffrey had the ball FIRMLY GRASPED IN BOTH HANDS with both feet in-bounds and on the ground. That was a TD before they instituted the CJ rule.
     
    #9
  10. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka
    DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    23,072
    Likes Received:
    3,339
    Ratings:
    +4,052 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    2,305ß
    under old rules incomplete forward passes would be result in a turn over, but the rules changed
    under old rules you could manhandle wr's all the way down the field, and closeline qb's and other players, but the rules changed
    under the old rules you could form a wedge on returns, you no longer can, the rules changed.

    my point is that it doesn't matter what the rules in the past were, what matters is what they are now, and how they now interpet the existing rules....b/c the interpetations change also.
     
    #10

Share This Page

Copyright © DaBears.com. This site is a news, entertainment and information site covering the Chicago Bears and their fans.
DaBears.com is an independent fan site and not associated with the Chicago Bears, National Football League, or any other media site.
All content is provided by, and for, Bear fans. We invite your participation and suggestions.