Rams Fans United - Los Angeles Rams Fan Discussion Forum

I don't care what anyone says, that was an interception. We were screwed by the refs on that one. As bad as we looked , and not saying we would have won the game, especially how pathetic our offense is, but still, don't help out Seattle with a cheap call like that to help them win.

I didn't like the call. He clearly had two feet down after possession, probably 3 steps. The explanation Collinsworth submitted was because the receiver also had his hands on the ball and was out of bounds, the ball was out of bounds. But I can't say I've ever seen a pass called incomplete when it's the defender out of bounds with his hands and the receiver's on the ball. I don't know if it was wrong by-the-rules but it sure wiped out a helluva play by Hager. IMHO, Hager had the ball in his hands and tightly in the crook of his arm.

I have to say in all these years I never heard the "if the defender is out of bounds when he touches the ball" the entire play is over rule. Seems like it would have occurred in reverse in the million or so NFL games I've watched over the last 50 years. It was a very athletic play by Hager. I am partial to linebackers. Toughest position on defense. Rams need more of them. Not sure about Littleton, but seeing a #58 out there was good.

Well my understanding of what Collinsworth said made sense. The receiver had his hands on the ball and when he stepped OB, the ball was OB
Hager was in the process of taking the ball away but the WR had possession first
Hate the result but if that's the rule it was applied correctly

I don't think the receiver ever had possession and like PA said, i've never seen that call go the other way where it's ruled incomplete when the defender is out of bounds while fighting for the ball.

I had a friend ask me last year what i thought of Bryce Hager and i was like "who?" Maybe he was on to something...

Elvis wrote:I don't think the receiver ever had possession and like PA said, i've never seen that call go the other way where it's ruled incomplete when the defender is out of bounds while fighting for the ball.

I had a friend ask me last year what i thought of Bryce Hager and i was like "who?" Maybe he was on to something...

He didn't have possession, he was in process of gaining possession.
That's the difference, when the defender is fighting for the ball, I don't recall them calling it OB, but this wasn't the case as Hager wasn't the receiver but the defender

Odd play (a Rams norm). I believe it all comes down to possession. The Hag receiver never had it. Hager did. There was a slight bobble though which would mean neither player had possession thus the OB ruling. So to me the question was if Hager had control through the entire process. He was clearly in bounds (nice footwork)

Sure sounds like a player who goes out of bounds can effect a play without re establishing himself on the field of play. ?? There sure are a few rules to the contrary.

OK, so, if there is an interception and the defender is running it back up the sidelines and one of the offensive players (now a defender) is running along side him out of bounds, and touches the ball, the play would be blown dead?
or,
If an out of bounds defender touches an offensive player (or just the ball) running down the sidelines ,, is that play dead?

Rams get loop-holed again.

Hacksaw wrote:Odd play (a Rams norm). I believe it all comes down to possession. The Hag receiver never had it. Hager did. There was a slight bobble though which would mean neither player had possession thus the OB ruling. So to me the question was if Hager had control through the entire process. He was clearly in bounds (nice footwork)

Sure sounds like a player who goes out of bounds can effect a play without re establishing himself on the field of play. ?? There sure are a few rules to the contrary.

OK, so, if there is an interception and the defender is running it back up the sidelines and one of the offensive players (now a defender) is running along side him out of bounds, and touches the ball, the play would be blown dead?
or,
If an out of bounds defender touches an offensive player (or just the ball) running down the sidelines ,, is that play dead?

Rams get loop-holed again.

End zone and field of play are two different things
I may not agree with the ruling, but it appears to be the right call per the rule.

dieterbrock wrote:End zone and field of play are two different things
I may not agree with the ruling, but it appears to be the right call per the rule.

I guess so. The end-zone thing still seems arbitrary.

Rams get loop-holed again.

Either way, it was a hell of a play by Hager.