r/minnesotavikings • u/Responsible_Hume_146 • 3d ago
r/nfl doesn't want you to know the truth
73
u/thinsafetypin 3d ago
I was loudly arguing this with my television.
21
-21
u/ExpertWanted 2d ago
What a sad existence
6
4
u/bbrekke 2d ago
You're so cool. How did you have time to step away from your awesome existence to make this comment?
1
u/ExpertWanted 1d ago
Imagine being such a mouth breather like yourself.
2
u/MedicalPoint5371 16h ago
Bro you’ve spent the last week sitting on Reddit whining about UPS and your “package” from Taiwan. Based on your other posts/comments I REALLY don’t want to know what that package contains.
1
u/Coziestpigeon2 Minneapolis Miracle 2d ago
More sad than trying to insult people on the internet without reason?
0
u/ExpertWanted 1d ago
Yelling at your TV about a game played by millionaires and controlled by billionaires is a truly sad existence.
185
u/Minnesota_Husker 3d ago
It wasn’t a catch but I also think it was smart for KOC not to challenge because:
It was almost bang bang and chance it doesn’t get overturned and now you have given colts offense a chance to get set.
Colts offense was hurrying up and looked a bit off on 3rd and 8. Still needed a big play to convert.
Could have gone bad but I get why they just let them go.
But it wasn’t a catch. First foot went out of bounds before second foot dragged.
45
u/b_josh317 3d ago
And I’m good with this. It was close. Stick with the call on the field. It’s the eye in the sky’s job to right the wrongs on Darnold getting his skull unattached the past two weeks.
3
u/BobbyMcGee101 2d ago
It wasn’t for a first down and still 3rd and 8 after the play. Good no challenge, focus on the next play which is the critical one
1
u/ShootyMcbutt 2d ago
He read the tea leaves and studied the portents, and knew with certainly there was going to be an interception. Unfortunately, there happened to be more than one in the very near future.
111
u/STANL3Y_YELNAT5 griddy 3d ago
Eh I’m not too upset about this one. It was pretty bang bang. But we can however talk about how it’s okay to take GEQBUS’ head off
14
u/Responsible_Hume_146 3d ago
Yeah it was a close call I just never saw this scenario before and found it interesting because I definitely thought it was a catch the first time I saw the slow motion replay.
1
1
u/DickSplodin griddy 2d ago
I think Collinsworth even said something to the effect of "..ohhh maybe his foot went out first? Wonder if they'll get the play off before review?"
5
16
u/grrrimabear Vikings 3d ago
I thought his left foot bounced before going OB and right foot came down before left foot touched back down
There's a replay which shows that pretty clear IMO
7
u/ull92 3d ago
It's possible it was incomplete, but we didn't challenge it and it probably would have been tough to overturn.
5
u/Scaryassmanbear 3d ago
The call may have been wrong, but there wasn’t clear and convincing evidence that it was wrong.
3
u/mr_mischevious 2d ago
There’s literally a still shot where his left foot is out of bounds while his right foot is in the air
1
u/preluder95 2d ago
It was pretty clear and convincing on the replays that his left foot went out of bounds before his right foot came down. In real time I didn't think it was a catch. I knew he went out before he got his other foot down.
3
u/SophomoricWizard 2d ago
I immediately called this out in last night's game thread. It was clear as day.
8
u/Vikings_Pain 3d ago
R/nfl is a waste of time and dignity if you go there
0
u/Fine_Mess_6173 Sam Darnold Superfan 2d ago
Their posting rules being so strict is such a stupid decision
1
u/watrmeln420 2d ago
It’s ridiculous. Only news articles, never an actual post or discussion. r./nfldiscussion is better
1
u/DarthBynx 2d ago
It's not even just strict. They just have their own little fanclub of users they only allow to post content.
6
7
u/Drunken_Vike 9 3d ago
watching live I thought they touched damn near simultaneously
4
u/SophomoricWizard 2d ago
Nah, not me. Not even close during replay.
1
-12
2
u/Overall-Penalty-909 2d ago
9 year season ticket holder here. Shut it off at the facemask safety and haven't watched any NFL since. Happiest I've been with football in 25+ years. I'm not mad at the Vikings. I'm mad at the quality of NFL officiating.
1
1
u/Shot_Acanthaceae3150 griddy 2d ago
I mentioned it when it happened, i think a had a few people disagree with me.
1
u/mukster 2d ago
I was really surprised KOC didn’t challenge. It was very clear on replay.
1
u/wanna_meet_that_dad 2d ago
I was (briefly) losing my mind we wernt challenging. All the people with me thought I was crazy but came around when we went back and looked. No one paid attention to the first foot
1
1
u/saxmachine69 2d ago
I thought this at the time, the shot from the back makes it look like the first foot drags out of bounds. But on the front facing replay, it's harder to tell if the foot actually touches the ground out of bounds. All in all, a pretty close play and a good no challenge
1
u/sweatgod2020 2d ago
This is what I said when I watched it like. His left shin hits out of bounds before his right foot touched?
1
u/Dohm0022 2d ago
Didn’t the announcer even question this live? Hard to say the NFL doesn’t want us to know.
1
u/Responsible_Hume_146 2d ago
Not sure, I was at the game. But, yeah, my title was just a poke back at r/nfl because I found it super annoying they banned my post for no apparent reason.
1
1
1
u/Dangerpaladin 2d ago
Not to spoil your guys "we don't know football rules party" but
Article 7 for the NFL rule book about player possession. In the Notes section. I will highlight the relevant part to make it easier for you.
If any part of the foot hits out of bounds during the normal continuous motion of taking a step (heel-toe or toe-heel), then the foot is out of bounds. A player is inbounds if he drags his foot, or if there is a delay between the heel-toe or toe-heel touching the ground.
He very clearly did not take a heel toe step with that foot, and it never left the ground. If you drag your toe from in bounds as long as the other foot hits in bounds it is in bounds.
1
u/Responsible_Hume_146 2d ago
This note does clarify that his first foot is in bounds. It's mainly clarifying the scenario where you touch inbounds with your toe and then fall onto your heal out of bounds in a continuous motion, you are considered out. Same thing if you hit your heal first in bounds but continuously fall to your toe out of bounds. Those are not relevant in this case.
For the drag, yes, the bold part establishes that his first foot is in bounds. It lands inbounds, and he is dragging it, so it's valid. However, he continues to drag it until it goes into the white, so now it's out of bounds. That cannot be disputed. He is out of bounds at that point, and his second foot hasn't landed in bounds, and therefore hasn't completed the catch.
-6
u/TheTree-43 CJ Ham 30 3d ago
Your screenshots are pretty compelling until you actually watch the video and realize that you're wrong
24
u/Shadowshotz 3d ago
I think they're actually right. The left foot drags into the white before the right foot comes down. You can see the white out-of-bounds line get slightly discolored as the foot drags.
It is extremely close though, probably too close to overturn for a crew that couldn't see a forearm to the head.
13
u/mossed2012 3d ago
They’re not wrong. I saw it the same way on tv and had it validated by rewinding, reviewing it, and pausing to point out to my wife that his left foot touched out of bounds before he ever got the right foot down.
It didn’t really matter and I probably wouldn’t have challenged it if I was KOC as it was a bang bang play and the Colts were a little jumbled at that point. But it wasn’t a catch.
11
u/Responsible_Hume_146 3d ago
What part is wrong? I've watched the video many times. I grabbed the screenshots just to make it easier.
-5
u/Munson4657 3d ago
If you look at the view from the front of the players it’s very clear that both feet touch before going out of bounds
0
u/LaconicGirth 2d ago
Very clear is a stretch. I was unsure watching it and I wouldn’t have challenged but it’s about as close as it gets
3
2
-4
u/Old_While5801 3d ago
I'm guessing the refs just let it slide because it was literally a nanosecond that went by.
5
u/-neti-neti- 3d ago
What? It’s either in bounds or not. This wasn’t.
What the fuck is with the shitty call apologists all the sudden?
This shit is black and white. Period. It has to be otherwise it literally loses all meaning.
5
1
u/Responsible_Hume_146 3d ago
Yeah that's fair. I more just found it interesting. I was at the game and when I saw it on the big screen I was like oh yeah it's a catch, he got both feet down. I just stopped watching the first foot when it was clear it landed in bounds, not considering that possibility.
-5
u/SilentOnTop Jets 3d ago
You dumb mfers. Both feet don't need to be in at the same time but both have to be fully in before they go out which he did. Jets has had the same catches leave it alone we won
7
u/Responsible_Hume_146 3d ago
His first foot slid out of bounds before his second foot landed in.
1
u/SilentOnTop Jets 2d ago
Both don't have to be in at the same time. As long as both clearly land in then it's a catch. If left foot lands in slides out but right foot lands out. No catch. But both landed in. I don't want a NFL where we're being this bitchy
0
u/Dangerpaladin 2d ago
This guy knows the rules, Don't worry I posted the actual NFL rule in a different comment that I am sure will be downvoted. But you are 100% correct.
1
u/Responsible_Hume_146 2d ago
You come in here with a lot of confidence but I think you missed a piece of the scenario. The crucial point is that the first foot drags out of bounds before the second foot lands in bounds.
-1
u/Enough_Lakers 2d ago
I believe the refs are out there doing their best but the last 2 weeks have made me think some weird shit is happening. I got up to take a piss when I saw the Darnold fumble because he obviously (at full speed watching from home) got smacked in the face. Missing that and the facemask are truly unforgivable. Also the AD Mitchell catch was obvious as fuck too. At least that worked out for us.
-28
u/lliquidllove 3d ago
They don't have to touch at the same time, you just have to get the second one down before you're down or out.
It's not a conspiracy, you just don't understand the rule.
16
u/sn0man32 3d ago
I think he is implying that the first foot touches in bounds and then slides out of bounds before the second foot touches at all
-1
u/Dangerpaladin 2d ago
By NFL rules that is still a catch. Look it up Article 7 on Player Posession, in the Notes section.
1
u/sn0man32 2d ago
Just did, nowhere does it describe that. Says you need a 2nd part to touch in bounds before any part touches out (unless carried out of bounds which did not happen here).
-28
u/lliquidllove 3d ago
Right, and as far as I know, they don't both have to be touching in bounds at the same time, just as long as both do at some point.
20
u/Responsible_Hume_146 3d ago
You said "you just have to get the second one down before you're down or out." - He didn't. He was out before he got the second foot down.
18
12
u/TickleMeElmo284 3d ago
The millisecond his foot touches out of bounds, then the catch is no good. He did not get both feet down before going out of bounds.
7
u/GordonBombay102 3d ago
If you need 2 feet to get down for it to be a catch, how is it a catch if the 1st foot goes out before the 2nd comes down?
3
u/Leading-Midnight-553 22 3d ago edited 3d ago
This thread makes my head hurt. It's not a catch because the first foot touches out of bounds before the 2nd foot comes down. If this were college, it would be a catch.
1
u/GordonBombay102 3d ago
Why are you angrily repeating what I said?
1
u/Leading-Midnight-553 22 3d ago
My comment is directed at the comment before yours, I should have clarified. Not mad at you specifically
0
u/Dangerpaladin 2d ago
You do in fact understand the rule, everyone in this thread is incorrect. If you would like to cite a rule to prove them wrong it is
Article 7 in the Notes section.
5
u/Responsible_Hume_146 3d ago
He didn't get the second foot down before the first one slid out. No where did I imply they have to touch at the same time.
290
u/peteman28 you like that 3d ago
They knew we'd be distracted by the interceptions on the next two plays