15 years later... did Bert Emanuel catch it?

[Boffo97]

(Apologies for the editorial slant of the above video, including the title... but it does show the best look at the play.)

After the debates intensified last week about whether or not refs were calling the games fairly, and certain members insisting that bad calls happen to everyone. So I tried to think back to one that benefited the Rams to a game changing degree.

The Bert Emanuel play was the closest thing I could think of, and with it being 15 years, and the resultant rule appearing to be very applicable to the results of today's Cowboys-Packers game, I wondered what you guys thought.

Me, I actually posted on the boards I was on from the time at the NFL rulebook two relevant rules: one said that if a pass hit the ground, it was ruled incomplete. Another said that if there was ever doubt as to whether a pass was complete or not, it was to be ruled incomplete. IMO, those two rules together make an ironclad case. You could also argue that if Emanuel really had control of the ball, he wouldn't have let it hit the ground.

Even after the new rule was made, I honestly think it would have still been an incompletion. After Emanuel hits the ground, the ball very clearly bounces up as if he hit the ground. This also argues against the idea that he had control of the ball.

I think it's also very relevant that it was a booth review, and a reversal of the call on the field, meaning the official ruled that there was concrete evidence that it was an incompletion.

And in the final analysis, I don't think it made a difference to the game anyway. Tampa Bay's offense SUCKED with a capital SUCKED that year. They made it as far as they did because of their D. If the incompletion was ruled a catch, it would have been 3rd and 10 rather than 3rd and 26, and there's honestly no reason to believe that Tampa Bay's next two plays, two more incompletions leading to turning over the ball on downs wouldn't have gone exactly the way they did.

What do you guys think?

Minor edit: The game in question was part of what's considered the 1999 season, but took place in early 2000.

 

[rhinobean]

This here because of the call in GB of incomplete pass to Bryant? If so, Bryant caught that pass and it was a bad call! Hate the cowboys but like to see games won without officials messing with the games!

 

[Boffo97]

This here because of the call in GB of incomplete pass to Bryant? If so, Bryant caught that pass and it was a bad call! Hate the cowboys but like to see games won without officials messing with the games!

I mentioned in the OP that I was thinking of posting it, then today's call was the final impetus in posting it.

As to that call... here's what the rule says: "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete."

Bryant went to the ground while catching the pass. He lost control of the ball and it touched the ground. Good call. Arguably bad rule made in response to the Emanuel incompletion.

 

[rhinobean]

I mentioned in the OP that I was thinking of posting it, then today's call was the final impetus in posting it.

As to that call... here's what the rule says: "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete."

Bryant went to the ground while catching the pass. He lost control of the ball and it touched the ground. Good call. Arguably bad rule made in response to the Emanuel incompletion.

It looked like he had control and was reaching out to get the ball in the end zone to me! I'm sure it will be the topic of discussion on bspn and elsewhere and I'll see it again, and again and again!

 

[Billy Baroo]

Not sure I like the flavor of this thread.

 

[Amitar]

According to the rules it was an incomplete. Stupid rule like many in the NFL.

 

[A55VA6]

In my eyes, Bert Emanuel caught that football. No doubt about it. In regard to the rules, it was a correct call back then. In today's NFL, that's definitely a catch and I think if that game was played today the outcome could definitely be a whole lot different.

 

[thirteen28]

It was a bad rule. But it was correctly interpreted at the time.

Still, I think the Rams could have kept them out of the end zone.

 

[den-the-coach]

This here because of the call in GB of incomplete pass to Bryant? If so, Bryant caught that pass and it was a bad call! Hate the cowboys but like to see games won without officials messing with the games!

Correct and the Cowboys should not have been there in the first place so justice served.

 

[Boffo97]

Not sure I like the flavor of this thread.

Ummm.... not sure what that's supposed to mean.

It looked like he had control and was reaching out to get the ball in the end zone to me! I'm sure it will be the topic of discussion on bspn and elsewhere and I'll see it again, and again and again!

But by the rule I quoted, it's an incompletion.

 

[Rambitious1]

JMHO, it would not have made a difference anyway.
As I recall, the next play the ref's DID NOT call what should have been an intentional grounding by the Bucs QB.
They should have lost almost all of the yardage they would have gained had that been ruled a catch.

 

[Rambitious1]

Ummm.... not sure what that's supposed to mean.


But by the rule I quoted, it's an incompletion.

Not even a question about it Boffo.
You are correct.

 

[Stranger]

No way was the NFL going to allow anything to alter their marketing story that year. Yes, the Rams caught a break on that call. It's just the way the NFL rolls when they've identified a team they want to be the story for that year.

 

[jsimcox]

Now i think that it should have been a catch, however, i'm glad that the crazy rules of the time deemed otherwise. Good job ref

 

[snackdaddy]

By the rule it was an incompletion. The rule should be changed to accommodate a catch like that. He clearly caught the ball and lost control trying to stretch it for a TD. But the rule does state it has to be controlled throughout the whole process.