I don't understand why the first one was not a TD

[JLEW1818]

Why catches have to be maintained?

Ball is thrown outside of the end zone.
Ball is caught in the end zone.
Caught.
One foot down in the end zone.

THE PLAY IS OVER

Why does football make these stupid rules. I'll never understand.

What is the the WR caught the ball and then kicked it in the stands as soon as he caught it?

[soonercastor]

You have to maintain possession man.

The Calvin Johnson rule

[David Earl]

I thought the call was correct, according to the rules. However, you could argue the OSU defender was guilty of targeting on the play. Did he not hit the TE in the facemask with his helmet? That would have taken the OSU defender out of the game and given OU the ball first and goal at the 1.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

It isn't a catch until you make a move common to the game of football.

[David Earl]

Similar idea denied OSU the oskie.

[Aries]

It was the right call, he didn't have the ball secured away so had not completed the catch.

[Eielson]

Similar idea denied OSU the oskie.

But their guy went straight to the ground. Our guy was on his feet.

[landrun]

Similar idea denied OSU the oskie.

This^^^ The exact same thing.

I personally don't like the rule but that's the way it is. You have to keep control after you hit the ground.

[soonertodd]

I thought the call was correct, according to the rules. However, you could argue the OSU defender was guilty of targeting on the play. Did he not hit the TE in the facemask with his helmet? That would have taken the OSU defender out of the game and given OU the ball first and goal at the 1.

That's what I was thinkin too.Especially as bad as the refs have been about calling it this year.that and a couple horrible spots and I'm thinkin ol t boonie lubed the refs up with some of that few hundred million he spent

[Eielson]

I think it was probably the right call, but I don't like the rule if that's the case. I understand the one about having to come up with it if you catch it on the ground, but he had both feet down, and there's no need for a "football move" when you're in the end zone. I think this just encourages unnecessary hits, which seems odd with all the targeting rules.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

But their guy went straight to the ground. Our guy was on his feet.

Funny thing is that their guy wasn't down because he landed on our guy. That was why the INT was ruled incomplete as he lost control when he was actually down.

[SoonerMachine]

This^^^ The exact same thing.

I personally don't like the rule but that's the way it is. You have to keep control after you hit the ground.

I feel the same way, especially with replay.

[BoulderSooner79]

I thought it was the right call, didn't think he really had time to secure it. Very close. The non-INT call was different - that's the rule about making a catch as you go to the ground rule.

[JLEW1818]

1' down in the end zone with possession for .00001 second should be a TD. Play is over as soon as caught and secured. That should be the rule.

[Judge Smails]

I agree.

[aurorasooner]

1' down in the end zone with possession for .00001 second should be a TD. Play is over as soon as caught and secured. That should be the rule. I think it's probably done to simplify it for the zebras.
If you've got a competent replay official that's not a Gordo type geezer and not blind, it shouldn't be a problem to identify a catch vs none catch. The EZ should be the only place on the field where it's debatable to go to the booth and possibly over-turned or upheld, since if you fumble after crossing the plane of the goal-line, it's still a touchdown. Should be the same deal with a catch for a TD, is my opinion, fwiw.

[stoopified]

I thought the call was correct, according to the rules. However, you could argue the OSU defender was guilty of targeting on the play. Did he not hit the TE in the facemask with his helmet? That would have taken the OSU defender out of the game and given OU the ball first and goal at the 1.That is exactly what I was screaming at my TV.

[bluedogok]

It is the NFL rules interpretations creeping into the college game.