Fitzgerald Incompletion = Goldson Interception

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by 9erReign:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
The ball hit the ground billy.

Even if it didn't the refs can only overturn what is being challengeg, weather Fitz madet he grab.

We had to challenge again to see if Goldston caught it. But we were out of challenges anyways. Sing prolly would of blew a challenge if we had one on that play.

Pretty sure that is false. If it was an int the ref could have reversed it using Cards challenge. They review the entire play.

No sir. That would be very unfair to the challenger plus would take way to long. Each play has several things that can be addressed. The refs would have to look into multiple rulings and effects of those rulings.

Its too confusing to look at the entire play.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by 9erReign:

Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:
The ball absolutely, unequivocally hit the ground.

I'll also be the first one to say it:

We got a break on that call. Fitz had possession and was down before Goldson swatted the ball out.

No. He had to have control all the way to the ground because he was contacted in the air. They got the call right.

Correct.

Fitz needed to hold the ball all the way through the catch.

Its the same reason the Crabtree catch long the sidelines was ruled incomplete against the Bears.

False! 1st Fitz did have control all the way to the ground. even slid 2-3 yards after contact before it was ripped out.

2nd. Crabs play was incomplete because he left knee hit out of bounds before his foot came down.

Originally posted by 49ersMan420:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by 9erReign:

Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:
The ball absolutely, unequivocally hit the ground.

I'll also be the first one to say it:

We got a break on that call. Fitz had possession and was down before Goldson swatted the ball out.

No. He had to have control all the way to the ground because he was contacted in the air. They got the call right.

Correct.

Fitz needed to hold the ball all the way through the catch.

Its the same reason the Crabtree catch long the sidelines was ruled incomplete against the Bears.

False! 1st Fitz did have control all the way to the ground. even slid 2-3 yards after contact before it was ripped out.

2nd. Crabs play was incomplete because he left knee hit out of bounds before his foot came down.

Fitz did not have complete control of the ball when he smacked the ground, it started to come out the second he hit the ground and goldson almost stripped his ass.

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by 9erReign:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
The ball hit the ground billy.

Even if it didn't the refs can only overturn what is being challengeg, weather Fitz madet he grab.

We had to challenge again to see if Goldston caught it. But we were out of challenges anyways. Sing prolly would of blew a challenge if we had one on that play.

Pretty sure that is false. If it was an int the ref could have reversed it using Cards challenge. They review the entire play.

No sir. That would be very unfair to the challenger plus would take way to long. Each play has several things that can be addressed. The refs would have to look into multiple rulings and effects of those rulings.

Its too confusing to look at the entire play.

Maybe for someone who knows NOTHING about Football. The Refs do actually overturn calls for another team based off challenges by their opponent. There are plenty of examples that support that. None that spring immediately to mind but it does happen.

~Ceadder

Originally posted by 49erfeeeever808:
most here are saying it hit the ground.

the ref said it hit the ground.


the MNF crew said it hit the ground.

and the replay showed it hit the ground.

Originally posted by 49erfeeeever808:
most here are saying it hit the ground.

the ref said it hit the ground.


the MNF crew said it hit the ground.

and the replay showed it hit the ground.

Originally posted by Daniel2778:

Originally posted by 49erfeeeever808:
most here are saying it hit the ground.

the ref said it hit the ground.


the MNF crew said it hit the ground.

and the replay showed it hit the ground.

am i the only person that didnt see it hit the ground? i can swear it never touched the ground

Originally posted by 49ersMan420:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by 9erReign:

Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:
The ball absolutely, unequivocally hit the ground.

I'll also be the first one to say it:

We got a break on that call. Fitz had possession and was down before Goldson swatted the ball out.

No. He had to have control all the way to the ground because he was contacted in the air. They got the call right.

Correct.

Fitz needed to hold the ball all the way through the catch.

Its the same reason the Crabtree catch long the sidelines was ruled incomplete against the Bears.

False! 1st Fitz did have control all the way to the ground. even slid 2-3 yards after contact before it was ripped out.

2nd. Crabs play was incomplete because he left knee hit out of bounds before his foot came down.

Fitz did not have complete control of the ball when he smacked the ground, it started to come out the second he hit the ground and goldson almost stripped his ass.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 49ersMan420:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by 9erReign:

Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:
The ball absolutely, unequivocally hit the ground.

I'll also be the first one to say it:

We got a break on that call. Fitz had possession and was down before Goldson swatted the ball out.

No. He had to have control all the way to the ground because he was contacted in the air. They got the call right.

Correct.

Fitz needed to hold the ball all the way through the catch.

Its the same reason the Crabtree catch long the sidelines was ruled incomplete against the Bears.

False! 1st Fitz did have control all the way to the ground. even slid 2-3 yards after contact before it was ripped out.

2nd. Crabs play was incomplete because he left knee hit out of bounds before his foot came down.

Fitz did not have complete control of the ball when he smacked the ground, it started to come out the second he hit the ground and goldson almost stripped his ass.

Fitz had control when he hit the ground at the 1. He had control as he slid into the endzone. Then Goldson eventually ripped it out.


Again I can see how they could have ruled this either way. But if roles were reversed and this was the 9ers on offense people would be saying it should have went the other way. Like another poster said. It was pretty much call on the field stands on this play. No matter what way it was called.

Originally posted by valrod33:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 49ersMan420:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by 9erReign:

Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:
The ball absolutely, unequivocally hit the ground.

I'll also be the first one to say it:

We got a break on that call. Fitz had possession and was down before Goldson swatted the ball out.

No. He had to have control all the way to the ground because he was contacted in the air. They got the call right.

Correct.

Fitz needed to hold the ball all the way through the catch.

Its the same reason the Crabtree catch long the sidelines was ruled incomplete against the Bears.

False! 1st Fitz did have control all the way to the ground. even slid 2-3 yards after contact before it was ripped out.

2nd. Crabs play was incomplete because he left knee hit out of bounds before his foot came down.

Fitz did not have complete control of the ball when he smacked the ground, it started to come out the second he hit the ground and goldson almost stripped his ass.

Fitz had control when he hit the ground at the 1. He had control as he slid into the endzone. Then Goldson eventually ripped it out.


Again I can see how they could have ruled this either way. But if roles were reversed and this was the 9ers on offense people would be saying it should have went the other way. Like another poster said. It was pretty much call on the field stands on this play. No matter what way it was called.

when he hit the ground and was sliding the ball was already starting to move around which made it easier for goldson to rip it out.

Watch it again

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by valrod33:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 49ersMan420:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by 9erReign:

Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:
The ball absolutely, unequivocally hit the ground.

I'll also be the first one to say it:

We got a break on that call. Fitz had possession and was down before Goldson swatted the ball out.

No. He had to have control all the way to the ground because he was contacted in the air. They got the call right.

Correct.

Fitz needed to hold the ball all the way through the catch.

Its the same reason the Crabtree catch long the sidelines was ruled incomplete against the Bears.

False! 1st Fitz did have control all the way to the ground. even slid 2-3 yards after contact before it was ripped out.

2nd. Crabs play was incomplete because he left knee hit out of bounds before his foot came down.

Fitz did not have complete control of the ball when he smacked the ground, it started to come out the second he hit the ground and goldson almost stripped his ass.

Fitz had control when he hit the ground at the 1. He had control as he slid into the endzone. Then Goldson eventually ripped it out.


Again I can see how they could have ruled this either way. But if roles were reversed and this was the 9ers on offense people would be saying it should have went the other way. Like another poster said. It was pretty much call on the field stands on this play. No matter what way it was called.

when he hit the ground and was sliding the ball was already starting to move around which made it easier for goldson to rip it out.

Watch it again

I've seen it enough during the game that I don't need to watch it again. It was only moving because Goldson started yanking on it. It didn't move because Fitz was losing control.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by valrod33:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 49ersMan420:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by 9erReign:

Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:
The ball absolutely, unequivocally hit the ground.

I'll also be the first one to say it:

We got a break on that call. Fitz had possession and was down before Goldson swatted the ball out.

No. He had to have control all the way to the ground because he was contacted in the air. They got the call right.

Correct.

Fitz needed to hold the ball all the way through the catch.

Its the same reason the Crabtree catch long the sidelines was ruled incomplete against the Bears.

False! 1st Fitz did have control all the way to the ground. even slid 2-3 yards after contact before it was ripped out.

2nd. Crabs play was incomplete because he left knee hit out of bounds before his foot came down.

Fitz did not have complete control of the ball when he smacked the ground, it started to come out the second he hit the ground and goldson almost stripped his ass.

Fitz had control when he hit the ground at the 1. He had control as he slid into the endzone. Then Goldson eventually ripped it out.


Again I can see how they could have ruled this either way. But if roles were reversed and this was the 9ers on offense people would be saying it should have went the other way. Like another poster said. It was pretty much call on the field stands on this play. No matter what way it was called.

when he hit the ground and was sliding the ball was already starting to move around which made it easier for goldson to rip it out.

Watch it again

I've seen it enough during the game that I don't need to watch it again. It was only moving because Goldson started yanking on it. It didn't move because Fitz was losing control.

Originally posted by 49erfeeeever808:
most here are saying it hit the ground.

the ref said it hit the ground.


the MNF crew said it hit the ground.

and the replay showed it hit the ground.