Clete Blakeman doesn’t know what a catch is.

[hepcat]

Blakeman is already infamous for his atrocious call in the Super Bowl on Cotchery’s catch. Ruled incomplete because there wasn’t enough evidence to overturn it, Blakeman said.

Today, very similar situation with the Reid INT. Except this time it was called an interception on the field. Ball never obviously hits the ground, doesn’t appear to move. Call was an interception should stay an interception then, right? Wrong. Blakeman overturns an INT because....I honestly don’t know. He doesn’t know what a catch is. Maybe he secretly hates the Panthers.

[OneBadCat]

That was some serious BS. There has to be at least some, even if it’s slight, bias against Cam and this team. SB 50, nearly every game against the Saints, and the fact that we are the victim of nearly every inspirational  BS feel good story game the NFL has had the past decade. The league doesn’t like Cam winning. That call could have ruined our season. Getting sick of the league playing fuggin Madden story mode

[Toolbox]

that motherfuger screwed us in the superbowl.. he hates us.

[Eazy-E]

Yeah you know, fug irrefutable evidence.

[SOJA]

I want an official explanation on how that WASN'T an INT

[Still Brooklyn]

25 minutes ago, OneBadCat said:

That was some serious BS. There has to be at least some, even if it’s slight, bias against Cam and this team. SB 50, nearly every game against the Saints, and the fact that we are the victim of nearly every inspirational  BS feel good story game the NFL has had the past decade. The league doesn’t like Cam winning. That call could have ruined our season. Getting sick of the league playing fuggin Madden story mode

We were the least penalized team last year. Try again.

[beastson]

The call was interception. His hand is underneath the ball. There's definitely no clear evidence the ground caused the catch. It took them a long ass time to review it too, you have to uphold the call

 

 

[OneBadCat]

6 minutes ago, Still Brooklyn said:

We were the least penalized team last year. Try again.

It's not the amount. It's the timing of the calls and if they were controversial. 

[Fright]

Ever see those buffalo wild wing commercials where the refs reverse a call to prolong the game to make fans happy? 

 

Well thats exactly what happened today.

[LinvilleGorge]

The NFL has had a major issue with the catch issue for a long time now. It was really brought to a head by the Megatron non-catch about controlling the ball all the way to the ground and it's been at the forefront of on-field controversy ever since.

Based on the NFL's own criteria of overturning a call on the field (conclusive evidence), there's no way you can overturn that INT. Yes, the ball MAY habe hit the ground and Reid MAY not have controlled it throughout the process, but there's no angle of replay that CONCLUSIVELY shows that was the case. You gotta stick with the call on the field on that scenario.

[Nails]

Minutes later in real time, TE Brate for the Bucs made a “catch” late in the 4th that actually did hit the ground.  Called a catch on the field, play stood as called.  The bias was clear as day watching those two calls minutes apart.

[t96]

40 minutes ago, SOJA said:

I want an official explanation on how that WASN'T an INT

It was absolutely fuging baffling. Thank god we held on and won anyways because if lost after that poo I'd have fuging lost my mind. Terrible call.

[OneBadCat]

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The NFL has had a major issue with the catch issue for a long time now. It was really brought to a head by the Megatron non-catch about controlling the ball all the way to the ground and it's been at the forefront of on-field controversy ever since.

Based on the NFL's own criteria of overturning a call on the field (conclusive evidence), there's no way you can overturn that INT. Yes, the ball MAY habe hit the ground and Reid MAY not have controlled it throughout the process, but there's no angle of replay that CONCLUSIVELY shows that was the case. You gotta stick with the call on the field on that scenario.

What I don't get about the Megatron thing especially is that it was in the redzone. If you catch it and two feet hit the ground how is it not a near instantaneous TD? 

Yet as a ball carrier you can run down the field and stretch the ball over the goal line and score a TD without ever physically being in the redzone. You can even reach over and get the ball knocked out and it's still a TD. 

[LinvilleGorge]

I think the biggest issue and why it continue to be an issue is that for the rules of the game, you have to strictly define it. I think we all pretty much know a "catch" when we see one, the problem arises when a "catch" that pretty much everyone in the bar would agree is a catch doesn't meet the definition per the rules book and I don't think we'll ever have rules where that doesn't occur.

This particular replay issue is a totally different one IMO. The evidence has to be conclusive. It wasn't conclusive, so by rule you have to stick with the call on the field. Had it been ruled incomplete and we challenged, it should've stayed incomplete. There was no conclusive view of that play that showed one way or the other.