Jimmy Graham catch somebody Please explain!!!!
 

How the H. E. double hockey sticks is that not a freakin touchdown. this game was call so far beyond bad that is silly!!! The ball is in his hand and secure, heel down inbounds and you come back after looking at the play and rule that it is not a touchdown!!!

The replay after the commercial clearly showed his foot barely touched the white line.

I hate it, but it was the right call.

Not a TD.

Was a TD. Heel touched down. Well before any notional toe touch of a blade of grass.

Some will also argue the other knee touched down before all that too.

A part of the foot isn't the entire foot.

The entire foot has to touch inbounds, not simply part of it.

It was the right call.

What about when you touch your toes on a catch? That's part of the foot isn't it?

what about the toe drag? that's acceptable, and even less than a heel

Yes it is, and if any other part of the foot land out of bounds its an incomplete pass

Wow! I would like to see the NFL rule book here.

If your 2nd foot lands OB, its an incomplete pass. This was a no-brainer. It was the right call no question.

The first foot was in. The heel of the 2nd foot was in, then the toe flicked one abnormaly long piece of grass painted white.
If had originally been called a good catch, NO WAY they overturn it

Wasnt his left butt cheek on the ground, before the toe went out? I always heard one cheek equals 2 feet.....

My contention is that the heel of the 2nd foot touched inbounds pre any tippy toe of that foot out of bounds. But there is now an implication there has to a complete foot inbounds (when I thought that tips of both feet inbounds always counted as TDs)

Its similar to a jump ball at the back of the endzone. Even if both toes come in bounds, but the heels hit OB, its an incomplete pass.

I am positive that that was the right call IMO.

I never saw the second foot ever touch the white, even the "grass blade." I saw it wave over the white and not touch out.

I may have missed the "other angle" you guys are talking about. I thought I saw every angle possible. We'll have to search for this on youtube. Fun conversation though.

The replay after commercial cleary showed white grass moving, similar to a fair ball in baseball.

His toe definitely touched OB before his knee hit. If I knew how to do youtube I could show you guys.

I rarely take zebra's sides since they so often screw up, but there is no doubt in my mind they made the right call.

Oh I beg to differ...

Here is where it gets grey.

If you get your toes down and you go out of bounds... its a catch. So the whole foot doesn't have to be in bounds!!!

What makes the heel of the foot any different.

I also like the Madden rule... one knee equals 2 feet.

That was a TD. Yes, I can understand how a ref would have called it not a TD.
Instant replay. Saints calling a challenge, you can see that was a TD. All of Graham was in. He even, it looked like he purposely, arched his back as to make sure his body was in.
His foot, the tip end of it, could have been seen as on the line.
Maybe. Hardly. Not really. He was in.

then we had a TD from the Titans in which the player was not in the EZ at all ruled as a TD.
Ok, whatever.
Explain it to me.
Yes, I understand football is fast and there are rules.
The officials can sometimes call really questionable plays , those either neither ones, in your favor or not. I know the Saints have had some of those favors. I know other teams have had some of those too.
This time was not an either-niether situation.

I am fair because Harper was wrong after that play when he grabbed a facemask.

That was the longest piece of freakin' grass on the field I ever saw. TD

Catching a ball..while... touching toes.... Gymnastics?

or a ghey olympic event

i wont say "no question" but...

As soon as we can find some video from youtube etc, would love to see it again. Anyone TiVo the game?

Danno is correct. Toe in but heel out equals "out of bounds" and the same goes for heel in, toe out.

BUT,

In this case, Jimmy Graham's knee was down before the toe hit. Should have been called a touchdown. Period.


http://i42.tinypic.com/35jgk1e.jpg

Yes but you can make a great catch with just your toes in bounds and your next complete foot or knee lands out of bounds its a catch. They make several of these highlights on ESPN weekly.

Another case this was a TD is that you DO NOT have to have both feet in bounds you can have a foot and a knee in which case its a TD they got it wrong by over looking his knee.

That pic is after his toe touched. The replay clearly showed his toe hit the line before his knee hit.

They explained the toe hitting one blade on white grass during the game and replay after replay... but his left foot and left knee let alone his ass where all in bounds before his toe when out of bounds...

A knee counts as a catch.

I dunno about this particular call, which I thought was a touchdown, but I said this elsewhere --I don't know who they were, but I think that this particular officiating crew today seemed really unprepared for the fast pace and envelope-pushing style of the modern pro football game...it was kinda like they were a bit "behind" the whole game, or couldn't handle it, including bad spots of the ball, phantom flags (picked up, "there is no foul on the play"), that weird false start on Drew, and on the field they seemed very confused about the TD play where the Titans QB held the ball over the pylon, etc. They just didn't seem like they could handle the pace and speed of the game. And kicking it to review is not going to overturn the call on the field unless it's totally conclusive, so there was a lot of stuff going on that was just kinda doubtful or seemed like they couldn't keep up with what was happening on the field. Calls on both sides, in fact.

Yes it does, but the replay showed his toe touched BEFORE his knee touched.

As I saw it, his whole body was in first.
Tip of right foot? Barely if at all.
Knee down first. Whole body in. Keeping possession of ball the whole time.

definition of a catch in the NFL. can anyone explain. I thought it was a catch.

Who cares if it was caught or not? We won!

It's an interesting conversation Mitch. I can't recall if the rules have changed and what exactly the rules are. That's all. We did win, but interesting controversy...

I don't get this. I've seen guys win TDs by dragging the toe, but dragging the heel is not considered a TD?? These rules get stupider every year.

Becky, I'm with you. It definitely needs clarification. I agree with both sides of the argument overall but I'm still confused with the logic behind it NOT being a catch.

We Saints fans were left dumfounded at the stadium today.

I just KNEW this game was being STOLEN from us for some reason.

Alaska still in TN

If the butt cheek is in, it is a TD!

Exactly what I thought. His butt hit before inbounds 1st then foot hit the ground. I still call BS it was a TD. Doesnt matter now...Saints still got the win in the end.

I dont get how you can just pass the ball over the orange pylon and get a TD (Titans QB) without getting your feet in the endzone but if you catch the ball in the endzone with your A$$ on the turf then roll or slide out of bounds, Its not a TD.
Im sorry Guys n Gals but that call was BS and the rules need to be adjusted or Fixed...however you want to phrase it.

Like I said...controversial or not, they still came away with a win!
SO....WHO DAT!!!!!

Who gives a sh*t. We won the game.