Warrior General Games

I've seen countless receptions followed by a "football move" that are called knocked loose after 10-30 ticks. Here is one of the worst I've seen yet - http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/12511/2241465

He dives and catches it, sits up, stands and the SS is still able to knock it loose.

This needs serious attention IMO.

Do you know what a football move is?

Originally posted by Jampy2.0
Do you know what a football move is?


What are you saying? That a receiver can catch the ball and have almost every part of his body touch the ground, stand up and start running, then have the defender knock it loose? This is a widespread bug.

Wait a minute, why am I even trying to reason with the biggest troll douche nipple on the site? GFYS

Calm down and shut up.

Getting up after you fall is not a "football move".

Originally posted by Jampy2.0
Calm down and shut up.

Getting up after you fall is not a "football move".

then Calvin Johnson would have even more touchdowns called back..

Originally posted by Jampy2.0
Calm down and shut up.

Getting up after you fall is not a "football move".

I'm not sure I understand your thinking here...if a receiver possesses the ball long enough to get up off the ground then that is a completed pass and any loss of possession from there is a fumble.

Do you know what a reception is?

What DeeVee8 is saying, although he didn't express it very clearly, is that such a result (knocking the ball loose after the receiver clearly has possession of the ball) should be ruled a fumble rather than a ball knocked loose. The term "football move" relates to anything a receiver might purposely do to advance his position with the ball, which includes the process of standing up after one has slipped. So, in the case of the linked play, the receiver catches the ball, slips, stands up (football move), then is hit and the ball pops out. That should be a fumble, not a ball knocked loose.

Originally posted by Jampy2.0

Getting up after you fall is not a "football move"

Yes it is.

Originally posted by justind0301
then Calvin Johnson would have even more touchdowns called back..

Calvin Johnson rule is just the fact that you must maintain possession all the way down especially when you hit the ground...

So you just keep quiet.

Originally posted by DeeVee8
I'm not sure I understand your thinking here...if a receiver possesses the ball long enough to get up off the ground then that is a completed pass and any loss of possession from there is a fumble.

Do you know what a reception is?

It's not about receptions, it's about a football move,

You are arguing that these should be fumbles and not KLs because of the "football move":

Originally posted by DeeVee8
I've seen countless receptions followed by a "football move" that are called knocked loose after 10-30 ticks. Here is one of the worst I've seen yet - http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/12511/2241465

I'm telling you that getting up after you fall is not a football move.

Originally posted by Jampy2.0
I'm telling you that getting up after you fall is not a football move.

I'm telling you that anything you do in an attempt to advance the ball up the field is a football move, and that includes standing up after falling down.

Originally posted by Badhands
I'm telling you that anything you do in an attempt to advance the ball up the field is a football move, and that includes standing up after falling down.

Getting up after you dive isn't a football move.
A Juke or spin however is indeed a football move.

Not much of a way to 100% validate this since this scenario hardly happens in real life,
depends on loose or tight construction of the rules imo, but this scenario (assuming WR doesn't maintain possession on the way down),
seems like it would be called incomplete irl.

This is a bad example by Deviate (Classic right?).

Yeah, I just tried to Google a solid definition on what constitutes a football move, but either there isn't one (it's a judgement call), or I can't find it (I'm incompetent).

Everything in my football experience and common sense says that if a receiver a) catches the ball, b) maintains possession long enough to stand up and c) takes a step (frames 79 - 80.5), then gets hit and loses the ball, it should be ruled fumble.

Alright.

First of all, I don't think all the late KLs should be fumbles. They should just be tackles...unless the defender wins a FF roll.

Secondly, a "football move" can be any movement made while in possession of the football. What you are saying Jampy is that, in GLB2 terms, a bot would have to have a Signature Ability fire after the reception to avoid a KL? We know that isn't correct and in terms of the NFL it sounds ridiculous.

Originally posted by DeeVee8
Alright.

First of all, I don't think all the late KLs should be fumbles. They should just be tackles...unless the defender wins a FF roll.

Secondly, a "football move" can be any movement made while in possession of the football. What you are saying Jampy is that, in GLB2 terms, a bot would have to have a Signature Ability fire after the reception to avoid a KL? We know that isn't correct and in terms of the NFL it sounds ridiculous.

I'm saying they have to do some kind of move, run a few steps, do SOMETHING.
No you idiot, you are arguing these KLs should be fumbles, because that is what would happen if the pass was considered complete.
Are you confused?

Originally posted by Badhands
Everything in my football experience and common sense says that if a receiver a) catches the ball, b) maintains possession long enough to stand up and c) takes a step (frames 79 - 80.5), then gets hit and loses the ball, it should be ruled fumble.

I think football move is indeed a judgement call. But anyway, my only problem in this example,
is that no football move was made.. Taking 2 steps isn't a football move lol, that is not the rule anymore...
This is since this is a game with incomplete animations we don't know if WR bobbled the ball on the way down, we don't know if the ball was laying on the WRs chest as he was on the ground.... We don't know any of that. Which is what is making this specific, and poor example imo hard to tell.

I am not arguing that the KL thing doesn't need to be looked at because I think it does, I've seen receivers fire SAs after catching in stride and still getting KLs, now that would make a good example.

Reread my posts and tell me where I said that they should be fumbles, idiot. Since there are countless examples of this there would be way too many fumbles occuring.

The KL roll is flawed...not the FF roll.