The Touchdown Call

[JEFF4i]

THis is a differing thread in that I really want sourced proof on it one way or another.

I know in the other 3 ends of the endzone, the ball does not have to cross into the endzone, so long as the receiver has it and two feet down. Does this differ for the front line? If so, I forcefully ask you to give me some form of sourced material saying so. I want to know definitively.

Second question, it looks to mee on my 69" TV(hehe, just bragging) that the ball crossed the line at one point, but not necessarily when he had posession. Does the player have to have posession when the ball is across the line, concerning the front line?

Again, I ask, please give me some source for the answers if you can. I guess the real interest is if the front line has a different ruleset than the other 3.

[SteelCityMan786]

Originally Posted by JEFF4i

THis is a differing thread in that I really want sourced proof on it one way or another.

I know in the other 3 ends of the endzone, the ball does not have to cross into the endzone, so long as the receiver has it and two feet down. Does this differ for the front line? If so, I forcefully ask you to give me some form of sourced material saying so. I want to know definitively.

Second question, it looks to mee on my 69" TV(hehe, just bragging) that the ball crossed the line at one point, but not necessarily when he had posession. Does the player have to have posession when the ball is across the line, concerning the front line?

Again, I ask, please give me some source for the answers if you can. I guess the real interest is if the front line has a different ruleset than the other 3.

As far as I am aware no to question 1.

Question 2 No, because if the receiver has possession of the Football, he can fumble it, and the recover it and put it in the endzone.

I can not give you a good source on this, this is just how I am aware how to interpret the rule in question.

[Dino 6 Rings]

Touchdown: When any part of the ball, legally in possession of a player inbounds, breaks the plane of the opponent’s goal line, provided it is not a touchback.

[Dino 6 Rings]

The ball crossed the line, hit Holmes in the hand, then he was hit from behind and the ball shifted from both hands to one hand as he was falling to the ground.

He had the ball, in both hands, with two feet down. No different than making the same catch at the back of the endzone and getting blasted out of bounds.

Same type of catch. The Catch was possession in both hands, feet down, ball over the line.

Done.

[ShutDown24]

The ball crossed the plane; Holmes had secure possession immediately after catching the ball.

It's more a judgement call, but they got it right. He did have possession with the ball crossing the plane.

[blue2noise]

[stlrtruck]

Originally Posted by JEFF4i

THis is a differing thread in that I really want sourced proof on it one way or another.

I know in the other 3 ends of the endzone, the ball does not have to cross into the endzone, so long as the receiver has it and two feet down. Does this differ for the front line? If so, I forcefully ask you to give me some form of sourced material saying so. I want to know definitively.

Second question, it looks to mee on my 69" TV(hehe, just bragging) that the ball crossed the line at one point, but not necessarily when he had posession. Does the player have to have posession when the ball is across the line, concerning the front line?

Again, I ask, please give me some source for the answers if you can. I guess the real interest is if the front line has a different ruleset than the other 3.

Yes according to rules on catching the ball in the endzone, he has to have possession of the ball in the endzone. If he were to bobble the ball and then catch outside the endzone, then the ball would be placed at the one. Because the ball did not bobble after it hit his chest, that is considered a catch.

For further clarification, I suggest you go to the NFL website and look at the rules. Either that or if you have the NFL Network watch for the head of officiating to explain it because I'm sure it will be one of the plays they look at this week.

[Moosebreath]

Originally Posted by JEFF4i

THis is a differing thread in that I really want sourced proof on it one way or another.

I know in the other 3 ends of the endzone, the ball does not have to cross into the endzone, so long as the receiver has it and two feet down. Does this differ for the front line? If so, I forcefully ask you to give me some form of sourced material saying so. I want to know definitively.

Second question, it looks to mee on my 69" TV(hehe, just bragging) that the ball crossed the line at one point, but not necessarily when he had posession. Does the player have to have posession when the ball is across the line, concerning the front line?

Again, I ask, please give me some source for the answers if you can. I guess the real interest is if the front line has a different ruleset than the other 3.

Here, I'll copy and paste my findings that I just posted in another thread.

Here's an online copy of the 2007 rulebook. Keep in mind that no changes were made regarding touchdowns in the 2008 rules.

http://www.patscap.com/rulebook.pdf

Rule 11, Section 2, Article 1:

It is a touchdown:

(d) Any player who is legally inbounds catches or recovers a loose ball on or behind the opponent's goal line.

This rule would strongly imply that there is no need, in that type of situation, for the ball to break the plane of the goal line."

[markymarc]

Well obviously this will be the most talked about play of the week. To me Holmes had possession when the ball hits his hands, both feet down and the tip of the ball is across the white line. Touchdown all the way. If anything the official that called it short screwed up.