I didn’t save it so I can’t be sure of this, but almost at the end of the game a Raiders receiver caught a pass at about the 1 yard line, fell down, rolled into the end zone, TD called, but on review he was called down by contact inside the 1. It looked to me like he fell from jumping forward to make the catch and wasn’t touched before breaking the plane. He was touched prior to that, but it didn’t look like he went down from that contact, and it didn’t look like he was touched while down. Am I missing something about the down by contact rule? Or did I miss the contact after he was down? Or should the ruling on the field have been upheld? The commentators were discussing where his knee hit the ground and whether the ball had broken the plane of the goal line at that time, which would be irrelevant if he wasn’t down by contact. Didn’t matter in the end, 5 or 6 or 100 plays later (I lost count), long after time ran out, the Raiders did score a touchdown and extra point to win.
He was touched on his way down to the ground.
He was touched, and that was enough.
The NFL rule:
Ok, I didn’t catch that touch. They may have believed he was already on the way down when touched, it appeared to me he was not, maybe I can find some video online.
That is not clear at all, plenty of players are contacted before they are down, it can’t be just any prior contact. It would have to be contact while on the way down, after they are down, or going down as a result of the contact
It says “a runner”; that means the player has possession of the ball when contacted.
I’ve never seen a passing play not called that way. If the receiver and a defender both jump, there is more than incidental hand on hand contact while the receiver is catching the ball, and the receiver falls as he’s catching the ball, he is down.
If receivers were not down in such situations, I suspect they’d be too apt to be injured with the defender needing to down them still and landing on top of them.
Also it wasn’t his knee contact that made him downed. He landed on his butt while the ball was clearly out of the end zone.
But I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many TD-noTD “final” plays of the game before.
Yeah, that make sense. The possession thing is murky when a receiver is falling to the ground, but being that it was called a clean reception, unless i can find video that shows he wasn’t touched that must be it.
Yes, as above, I’ll assume they saw some contact I didn’t see. And that really was an unusual ending with one defensive penalty after another. Kind of fun to watch.
I eventually started singing, “This is the game that doesn’t end, they threw another flag again…”
(I actually did, I’m ashamed to admit.)