Unless his shoulder had a freaking red helmet on it then it was no how no way "incidental" Jesus H is there a wide spread glaucoma epidemic within the borders of that state?
The rule plainly states, "when caught by a player of the passing team". You would have a legitimate argument if your boy had actually caught the ball, but he didn't. Rule 2, Section 4, Article 3 covers and defines what is a catch. Article 4 of the same section covers simultaneous possession again.[/quote] Slow your roll there. You gloss over the footnotes between Articles 3 and 4. Read them and Article 4 is a moot point. Pay particular attention to 'e' it is what is referred to as "not maintaining possession through contact". Watch any game and you are all but certain to witness plays where a player losses control of the ball as he lands and it will be called an incomplete pass 99% of the time. ARTICLE 3. a. To catch a ball means that a player: 1.Gains possession (Rule 2-4-1) of a live ball in flight; or 2.Leaves his feet and firmly grasps a live ball in flight, the ball first touching the ground inbounds while still in his firm grasp; or 3.Leaves his feet, firmly grasps a live ball in flight and either first returns to the ground inbounds with any part of his body or is so held that the dead-ball provisions of Rule 4-1-3-p apply (A.R. 2-4-3-I-IV and A.R. 7-3-6-III). If one foot first lands inbounds and the receiver has possession and firm control of the ball, it is a catch or interception even though a subsequent step or fall takes the receiver out of bounds (A.R. 7-3-6-XV). A player who satisfies any of these three conditions is said to have completed a catch. b. An interception is a catch of an opponent’s pass or fumble. c. A catch by any kneeling or prone inbounds player is a completion or interception (Rules 7-3-6 and 7). d. A player recovers a ball if he fulfills any of the three criteria for catching a ball that is still alive after hitting the ground. e. Loss of ball simultaneous to returning to the ground is not a catch, interception or recovery. f. When in question, the catch, recovery or interception is not completed. No, since the rule is referring to a ball carrier and the only time the word catch is used in this article is in reference to kicks, this is definitely not what defines a catch. This rule basically is stating that the ground can't cause a fumble or a loose ball after contact with the ground is not a fumble.
lol I changed the post to a picture. Let me know if you'd like an 8X10 in a nice frame to hang in your den and I'll get one made up special just for you
Watch the video again Shane. I don't see how you can think the helmets where the first to hit. I've watched it more than a dozen times today and still see it as forearm to shoulder as first contact point. It's my assumption the official thought that was too high. The helmets did collide after first contact. Hell, it's close as I said. That's the reason I started the thread. I suspect we could have a couple of threads like this each week this season. On another note, I didn't see the video of the other ejection last night. Since Tulane is LSU's rival...shouldn't one of you guys have that?
I watched it, paused it, took a screenshot of it, and posted the moment of impact where the guy blows up the Indiana players dome like Gallagher with a sledge o matic. Not sure what is hard to see, helmet right smack on helmet bro. At least from that angle anyway. That dude must be your cousin or something.
You are serious hard case. Watch it full speed about three times and tell me its incidental contact. Then read the new rule again and tell me that he didn't target the players head and neck.
We can get into the rest of your post later if you like. In my opinion your whole premise falls apart in the second sentence here. Caught the ball? Photos show he had possession of the ball.
