The Browns Get Screwed by the NFL Double Standard

RBs already have clear possession of the ball before they enter the end zone. When they advance the ball over the goal line (and while they are still in bounds), they've scored the touchdown. Even if they leap and land out of bounds, so long as they didn't step on or have any part of their body TOUCH the out of bounds line before they enter the end zone, they are considered in bounds.

A receiver, on the other hand, must demonstrate possession of the ball before going out of bounds. This is the case in all areas of the field, not just the end zone. They must have both feet in bounds, have the ball in their possession, and either perform a football move, or hold onto the ball when they hit the ground.

There is no double standard. It isn't just the ball that must break the plane, the ball must be possessed by a player. If it is not possessed, a player must gain possession of it. For a receiver to do this, he must have two feet in bounds.

I was out of the house at the end of the game, but you know what? The Browns had the Cards on the ropes, and they blew it.

maybe to make it more fair on widerecivers they could have it like in college football were only 1 foot needs to be in. Im sure there will be some issues but its worth a shot they could try it out in preseason and if they dont like it or it doesnt work and just causes mor contraversy they can go back to the old rules

but you do make a good point nontheless

How many of these Running Backs when they dive across the endzone landing out of bounds let go of the ball in mid air or have the ball knocked away. Maybe backs should be required to maintain control of the ball when diving for the endzone.

Not to mention the poor implementation of instant replay. These are the types of plays that should be reviewed. This play was reviewed but the ruling on the field of was not a ruling that could be reviewed according to the analyst. I am not sure why they would have done this or if it was simply to confirm that he didn't get both feet in?? Never the less, Plays like this at the end of a game (last 2 minutes) should all be subject to booth review. All calls on the field during the last 2 minutes should also be able to be over turned by the booth.

Getting screwed was a condition that Cleveland had to accept to get their NFL team back.

The thing about this 'double standard' is that for a player to technically have posession of the ball they need to get both feet down and make a football move. Because of this rule it means that a reciever doesnt technically have posession of a ball until both of his feet have touched the ground. A runningback on the other hand has his feet constantly running on the ground with the ball in his hands therefore establishing possesion.

Cleveland got a couple of extremely bad calls that actually went there way in this game. As a Cleveland fan you learn that even a couple alls your way is a success.

I would complain about that last call with Winslow in the endzone, but it really won't do much good. I thought it was a bad call, but it was really a bang-bang judgement call play. Besides, the Browns wouldn't be in a position to tie that game if they hadn't gotten extremely lucky on two different calls.

1. Sean Jones didn't make that interception, it hit the ground. 2. Braylon Edwards should have been down by contact at the 45.

If those calls weren't made, there'd be room to complain for us. But the Browns got calls, which is hugely surprising. You win some, you lose some.

If they change it for the end zone then they need to change it all together....which means balls caught in the 50 yard line as long as the reciver had possesion it doesnt matter if he is out of bounds or not. tenthman.net

It seems to me like the Browns got screwed by their inability to hold onto the football.

I went to the game today. So many times there was a open person deep through out the game. We should have won this game hands down. This offseason the team so needs to upgrade the DB's. Oh and I am so sick of RB up the middle. It doesn't work.

I don't know how this article got so many votes. It is nothing but whining about a good rule that Kdark11 thinks "screwed" his team.

Try to understand this:

In order for a ball to be considered "caught" the receiving player must get two feet in bounds and perform a football move. A football move is anything that demonstrates possession of the ball. A receiver can fall out of bounds with the ball, and so long as he hangs onto it, it is a catch. If a ball is not caught and touches the ground, it is considered incomplete, and the play ends. If a ball is caught out of bounds, it is incomplete.

Passing plays are unlike running plays in that passing plays can end without a tackle, a score, or a player going out of bounds. This is known as an incomplete pass.

When a ball is being possessed by a player, and it crosses the opponent's goal line, it is a touchdown. The reason receivers have to apparently do more than runningbacks is because runningbacks already have possession of the ball when it crosses the plane, receivers DO NOT. Therefore, they must demonstrate GAINING POSSESSION of the ball. A receiver who catches a ball outside of the end zone only has to put the ball over the goal line, just like a runningback.

If you want to bitch about a bad call, or a bad replay judgment, that's fine. But this theory about a "double standard" is childish and poorly thought out.

I'm for two feet and eliminate the pushed out clause. The receiver must have two feet in bounds for possession. If he doesn't, it's incomplete. Doesn't matter whether he was pushed out or not. That way it's not subjective.

Sorry, but having seen the Jets lose a bogus game to the Browns last year when Chris Baker made a clear catch in the endzone and was levelled such that he landed out of bounds, I don't think the Browns have much room to complain here.

Has nothing to do with being a RB. If a receiver is running he can do the same thing. The point is that either you can have two feet in the endzone and the ball not be, or you not be but the ball breaks the plane. But either way one has to have control of the ball INBOUNDS.