breaking the plane

Largent80":32jyybfa said:

I am making a white russian, anyone want one?

Click to expand...

A beverage man? I'm in!!

you kidding , heck ya.. i'm just happy i've been able to knock a few hrs off the clock at work...

on a serious note, it felt good to debate a topic, have good dialog, good points, and it never went to the personal level where a lot of these go.. i apprecate all the responses.. now lets get into this whole tackling by dreadlock thing :mrgreen:

hawker84":2nmlv7v2 said:

.. but to answer, i've always felt the ball should be placed where the ball carriers body first touches the ground, be it a knee, hand or whatever... if the ball comes loose, during the stretching it out process, then i feel it should be ruled a fumble..because he is still making a football move.. i know the ground can't cause a fumble , yet another rule i don't like..

the rice play .. he was hit and the ball was dislodged at the same time he was contacting the ground, had that play been on the 20 yrd line, you cannot tell me that play wouldn't have been reviewed and possibly called a fumble...

Click to expand...

First part consistent with your take on the TD rules. I completely disagree but appreciate the fact that I am discussing this with someone that is consistent in his beliefs. Consistently wrong of course but never-the-less

I haven't replayed it over and over again but to me he lands on the ground then gets smacked while firmly sitting on the ground in the end-zone. He was down, got hit falls backwards and balls comes loose.

As I recall it he did not get hit as he was going down but when his body was on the ground. I looked at it specifically at the time because if they ruled him outside of the endzone it was key item to if it would be a turnover or down on the 1 yard line. I recall the commentators saying something to this effect as well

hawker84":2shpdb9d said:

plays on the field and plays in the endzone are no where near consistent as to how to they are called dead..

Click to expand...

Right, and the breaking the plane rule takes out all doubt or referee interpretation of possession.

Did it break the plane? Yes. /discussion.

All other ways of determining whether it was a TD have to do with possession. Did he possess the ball all the way to the ground? Did he have possession all the way through the "football move?" All this does is leave it up to referee interpretation, which as we've found out to our benefit, but more times than not detrimental to our benefit........is not a good thing if you can avoid it. Breaking the plane avoids it.

i absolutely agree with you SGT, when that call goes for us, but if that same call is for a opposing player is it not detrimental to our benefit? kinda goes both ways does it not.. but i'm all for taking referies out of the equation, if the plane rule accomplishes that, then i'm for it on the aspect.

Mikeak... i have not seen a replay of the play as well, i'm just going off memory... but to me he looked to still be falling when he was contacted, very close , i could be wrong on that...

hawker84":2peheoxp said:

but i'm all for taking referies out of the equation, if the plane rule accomplishes that, then i'm for it on the aspect.

Click to expand...

It does, that's why the league implemented it.

/discussion