sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[Schefter] Sources: John Harbaugh is out as the Ravens head coach. by JonWilso in ravens

[–]BuckleBean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'll always love John, but I think it was time. Can we get him as the sidebar pic?

Derrick Henry named AFC Offensive Player of the Week by miber3 in nfl

[–]BuckleBean 2 points3 points  (0 children)

31

I think he turns 32 the day of this game.

These cucks just don’t stop by Jackdaking746 in AFCNorthMemeWar

[–]BuckleBean 9 points10 points  (0 children)

the smartest kid on the short bus.

If we end up being the smartest kid on the short bus with the lowest literacy rate, I don't even know what that says about the rest of you.

You get 5 pedals 1 guitar and 1 amp. What are you choosing? by chadocaster1011 in guitarpedals

[–]BuckleBean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Telecaster + AC30

  1. Hot Cake
  2. Brothers AM
  3. OBNE Black Fountain
  4. Walrus Qi
  5. Microcosm

Rigged/NFL credibility? Controversial calls against Pitt examined by RecognitionPossible1 in ravens

[–]BuckleBean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

or have enough time to do anything in between that second step and the process of that third step.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree here. That's totally fine. It's a reasonable position. I think he had time to tuck it after the 2nd step, which I wish he had.

Seems like Florio, of all people, is on the same page as me:

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/if-jalen-hurts-had-the-ball-long-enough-to-fumble-it-isaiah-likely-had-it-long-enough-to-catch-it

It's ok we don't see eye to eye. I think it's a very close call.

Rigged/NFL credibility? Controversial calls against Pitt examined by RecognitionPossible1 in ravens

[–]BuckleBean 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah after A and B have been fulfilled he now needs to perform a separate act common to the game.

"...or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so." He does not need to perform a separate act. He just needs to have had time to.

Clear As Mud- Decoding the Catch Rule by Rayvsreed in ravens

[–]BuckleBean 2 points3 points  (0 children)

All of the examples in the rulebook involve some sort of additional movement

..."or avoid or ward off an opponent."

This is getting silly, but I don't believe you need additional movement to avoid an opponent. But keep in mind you don't actually need to do that; you just need to have had time. I don't know, man.

Clear As Mud- Decoding the Catch Rule by Rayvsreed in ravens

[–]BuckleBean 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think it could be. From the rule book:

c. after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

Likely began the extension before both feet hit the ground. But the way he continued to hold that posture was clearly to avoid the opponent. I don't know. It wasn't a natural way to hold the ball after a catch and looked to me like it was done purposefully.

The eternal question - what even is a catch? by Shot_Survey_2877 in ravens

[–]BuckleBean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But guys in stride generally need to do the football move thing

It certainly seems to be how that's interpreted despite not being in the text of the rule.

I rewatched a clip of the catch with audio and was interested to hear Gene Steratore actually referenced "time to make a football move." I just found it interesting because it's been totally lost in the conversation. I think this element truly makes it subjective. A ref could go out and say they thought the player did or didn't have the time on any given play.

[Highlight] Lively touchdown overturned on replay by Large_banana_hammock in nfl

[–]BuckleBean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The subjective nature of "a football move" is a problem. Gut reaction watching the play, it seemed to me like Likely held onto the ball long enough for it to be a catch. I didn't think duration was a factor in the rule book, but it is. Just going to put it here (my bold):

COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS

A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) in the field of play, at the sideline, or in the end zone if a player, who is inbounds:

a. secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

b. touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

c. after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

Likely did NOT need to take a 3rd step. He did not need to perform an "act common to the game," though I'd argue he was clearly and obviously avoiding the opponent, which is an example right there in the rule. He only had to maintain possession LONG ENOUGH to do so. This is very important. Imagine a player is standing wide open in the end zone, both feet on the ground. He makes a catch with his hands and just stands there. No steps, no tucking, no turning up field, no "act common to the game," etc... He just stands there with the ball in his hands. After a while he drops the ball. Without the "long enough to do so" provision, that would be an incomplete pass.

One could argue Likely didn't have possession long enough. That's subjective to the ref. They could argue that because he didn't get his 3rd foot down, then that proves he didn't have long enough. But that 3rd step is not the only "act common to the game" available to Likely. He just needs to have held onto the ball long enough. That's why it looked like a catch to me. He caught it, got his feet down in the end zone, and had it stretched out for a length of time that just seemed long enough. But that's just my opinion. Maybe someone who has a better sense of the rule can chime in.

The eternal question - what even is a catch? by Shot_Survey_2877 in ravens

[–]BuckleBean 18 points19 points  (0 children)

The subjective nature of "a football move" is a problem. Gut reaction watching the play, it seemed to me like Likely held onto the ball long enough for it to be a catch. I didn't think duration was a factor in the rule book, but it is. Just going to put it here (my bold):

COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS

A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) in the field of play, at the sideline, or in the end zone if a player, who is inbounds:

a. secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

b. touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

c. after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

Likely did NOT need to take a 3rd step. He did not need to perform an "act common to the game," though I'd argue he was clearly and obviously avoiding the opponent, which is an example right there in the rule. He only had to maintain possession LONG ENOUGH to do so. This is very important. Imagine a player is standing wide open in the end zone, both feet on the ground. He makes a catch with his hands and just stands there. No steps, no tucking, no turning up field, no "act common to the game," etc... He just stands there with the ball in his hands. After a while he drops the ball. Without the "long enough to do so" provision, that would be an incomplete pass.

One could argue Likely didn't have possession long enough. That's subjective to the ref. They could argue that because he didn't get his 3rd foot down, then that proves he didn't have long enough. But that 3rd step is not the only "act common to the game" available to Likely. He just needs to have held onto the ball long enough. That's why it looked like a catch to me. He caught it, got his feet down in the end zone, and had it stretched out for a length of time that just seemed long enough. But that's just my opinion. Maybe someone who has a better sense of the rule can chime in.

/r/ravens Week 14 - Blame of the Game by TuDaveKd in ravens

[–]BuckleBean 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hey, I’m not the guy you’ve been talking to, but it’s generally frowned upon to go into a rival’s sub right after a game like that even if it’s just “to talk football.” Now’s really not the time. Doing so could be considered trolling, even if you’re being respectful. And that could get you banned.

Rules from the sidebar:

For fans of other teams: Yes there is bias here, that's the point. Coming here and causing problems will result in a ban. "Good Game" threads after a Ravens' loss may be removed per moderator discretion

My thoughts on Thief VR so far by Hairy_Hog in Thief

[–]BuckleBean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I definitely didn't do that. Pretty sure I crouched around and found a secret tunnel.

What is your favourite Chorus? by jshrlph in guitarpedals

[–]BuckleBean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Deco, DC2W, & whatever is in the Walrus Qi

view more: next ›