Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Is it
Comments
-
They could fall down and scream in agony - I mean make a soccer move
-
When is a catch more than the ball hitting you in the hands? When does it go from starting to catch to being caught? That is why the definition exists - to define having control/it was caught.MikeDamone said:
Catching the ball is controlling the ball. JFC. It’s in the word catch. That’s what it mean.Mad_Son said:
If you don't have a definition for controlling the ball you don't have a consistently enforceable rule.CarlosDanger said:
In other words, the term was invented so a bunch of fags (see Mad_Son and Dean Blandino) can explain why a player that clearly caught a football didn't actually catch the football.MikeDamone said:I’m adding “football move “ to new things announcers say that are annoying. WTF does that even mean. You know what a “football move” is? Catching the ball. Why is taking a step a “football move”. And why is it a football move and not just a move. These people sound like cliche dropping dip shits
I suppose the fact that you don't understand this is why you display your sign so proudly.
What’s my sign?
Do you really not understand this or is this just more of your schtick to complain about everything? -
-
(My guess) Is that he understands that the phrase "football" move is confusing, irritating and adds nothing to the definition of catch. It has nothing to do with a catch and it doesn't actually define a catch even though it's in the rules.Mad_Son said:
When is a catch more than the ball hitting you in the hands? When does it go from starting to catch to being caught? That is why the definition exists - to define having control/it was caught.MikeDamone said:
Catching the ball is controlling the ball. JFC. It’s in the word catch. That’s what it mean.Mad_Son said:
If you don't have a definition for controlling the ball you don't have a consistently enforceable rule.CarlosDanger said:
In other words, the term was invented so a bunch of fags (see Mad_Son and Dean Blandino) can explain why a player that clearly caught a football didn't actually catch the football.MikeDamone said:I’m adding “football move “ to new things announcers say that are annoying. WTF does that even mean. You know what a “football move” is? Catching the ball. Why is taking a step a “football move”. And why is it a football move and not just a move. These people sound like cliche dropping dip shits
I suppose the fact that you don't understand this is why you display your sign so proudly.
What’s my sign?
Do you really not understand this or is this just more of your schtick to complain about everything?
My question is if you catch a ball while stopping and stand still at the same time can someone cause a fumble four seconds later by hitting you? Or is doing nothing a football move? Or is actually catching the ball a football move?
I think we/he knows what they were trying to say when they wrote the rules perhaps they just weren't successful.
-
The rules don't use "football move" but "act common to the game [while maintaining control]".EwaDawg said:
(My guess) Is that he understands that the phrase "football" move is confusing, irritating and adds nothing to the definition of catch. It has nothing to do with a catch and it doesn't actually define a catch even though it's in the rules.Mad_Son said:
When is a catch more than the ball hitting you in the hands? When does it go from starting to catch to being caught? That is why the definition exists - to define having control/it was caught.MikeDamone said:
Catching the ball is controlling the ball. JFC. It’s in the word catch. That’s what it mean.Mad_Son said:
If you don't have a definition for controlling the ball you don't have a consistently enforceable rule.CarlosDanger said:
In other words, the term was invented so a bunch of fags (see Mad_Son and Dean Blandino) can explain why a player that clearly caught a football didn't actually catch the football.MikeDamone said:I’m adding “football move “ to new things announcers say that are annoying. WTF does that even mean. You know what a “football move” is? Catching the ball. Why is taking a step a “football move”. And why is it a football move and not just a move. These people sound like cliche dropping dip shits
I suppose the fact that you don't understand this is why you display your sign so proudly.
What’s my sign?
Do you really not understand this or is this just more of your schtick to complain about everything?
My question is if you catch a ball while stopping and stand still at the same time can someone cause a fumble four seconds later by hitting you. Is doing nothing a football move? Or is actually catching the ball a football move?
I think we/he knows what they were trying to say when they wrote the rules perhaps they just weren't successful.
I think the issue is the difference in interpretation of "catch" between "catching the ball" and "completing the catch". -
And some would say only a schizophrenic (sic) would claim a difference in interpretation of "catch" between "catching the ball" and "completing the catch".whatshouldicareabout said:
The rules don't use "football move" but "act common to the game [while maintaining control]".EwaDawg said:
(My guess) Is that he understands that the phrase "football" move is confusing, irritating and adds nothing to the definition of catch. It has nothing to do with a catch and it doesn't actually define a catch even though it's in the rules.Mad_Son said:
When is a catch more than the ball hitting you in the hands? When does it go from starting to catch to being caught? That is why the definition exists - to define having control/it was caught.MikeDamone said:
Catching the ball is controlling the ball. JFC. It’s in the word catch. That’s what it mean.Mad_Son said:
If you don't have a definition for controlling the ball you don't have a consistently enforceable rule.CarlosDanger said:
In other words, the term was invented so a bunch of fags (see Mad_Son and Dean Blandino) can explain why a player that clearly caught a football didn't actually catch the football.MikeDamone said:I’m adding “football move “ to new things announcers say that are annoying. WTF does that even mean. You know what a “football move” is? Catching the ball. Why is taking a step a “football move”. And why is it a football move and not just a move. These people sound like cliche dropping dip shits
I suppose the fact that you don't understand this is why you display your sign so proudly.
What’s my sign?
Do you really not understand this or is this just more of your schtick to complain about everything?
My question is if you catch a ball while stopping and stand still at the same time can someone cause a fumble four seconds later by hitting you. Is doing nothing a football move? Or is actually catching the ball a football move?
I think we/he knows what they were trying to say when they wrote the rules perhaps they just weren't successful.
I think the issue is the difference in interpretation of "catch" between "catching the ball" and "completing the catch". -
And some would say only a schizophrenic (sic) would claim a difference in interpretation of "football move" and "act common to the game [while maintaining control]".EwaDawg said:
And some would say only a schizophrenic (sic) would claim a difference in interpretation of "catch" between "catching the ball" and "completing the catch".whatshouldicareabout said:
The rules don't use "football move" but "act common to the game [while maintaining control]".EwaDawg said:
(My guess) Is that he understands that the phrase "football" move is confusing, irritating and adds nothing to the definition of catch. It has nothing to do with a catch and it doesn't actually define a catch even though it's in the rules.Mad_Son said:
When is a catch more than the ball hitting you in the hands? When does it go from starting to catch to being caught? That is why the definition exists - to define having control/it was caught.MikeDamone said:
Catching the ball is controlling the ball. JFC. It’s in the word catch. That’s what it mean.Mad_Son said:
If you don't have a definition for controlling the ball you don't have a consistently enforceable rule.CarlosDanger said:
In other words, the term was invented so a bunch of fags (see Mad_Son and Dean Blandino) can explain why a player that clearly caught a football didn't actually catch the football.MikeDamone said:I’m adding “football move “ to new things announcers say that are annoying. WTF does that even mean. You know what a “football move” is? Catching the ball. Why is taking a step a “football move”. And why is it a football move and not just a move. These people sound like cliche dropping dip shits
I suppose the fact that you don't understand this is why you display your sign so proudly.
What’s my sign?
Do you really not understand this or is this just more of your schtick to complain about everything?
My question is if you catch a ball while stopping and stand still at the same time can someone cause a fumble four seconds later by hitting you. Is doing nothing a football move? Or is actually catching the ball a football move?
I think we/he knows what they were trying to say when they wrote the rules perhaps they just weren't successful.
I think the issue is the difference in interpretation of "catch" between "catching the ball" and "completing the catch".
(And yes, by responding to my own post I must be the aforementioned schizophrenic). Hardcore Husky where the jokes write themselves.
-
This is a perfect fight. A lot going on, action in every direction, but nobody really getting hit too hard...if at all. Like MMA with oversize gloves and ankle weights.RaceBannon said:
More of what makes HH a top ten internet site for UW athletics. -
Catching it is catching it. This football move fucktarded term recently made its way into the lexicon. How did we manage 65 years of people not say "football move".Mad_Son said:
When is a catch more than the ball hitting you in the hands? When does it go from starting to catch to being caught? That is why the definition exists - to define having control/it was caught.MikeDamone said:
Catching the ball is controlling the ball. JFC. It’s in the word catch. That’s what it mean.Mad_Son said:
If you don't have a definition for controlling the ball you don't have a consistently enforceable rule.CarlosDanger said:
In other words, the term was invented so a bunch of fags (see Mad_Son and Dean Blandino) can explain why a player that clearly caught a football didn't actually catch the football.MikeDamone said:I’m adding “football move “ to new things announcers say that are annoying. WTF does that even mean. You know what a “football move” is? Catching the ball. Why is taking a step a “football move”. And why is it a football move and not just a move. These people sound like cliche dropping dip shits
I suppose the fact that you don't understand this is why you display your sign so proudly.
What’s my sign?
Do you really not understand this or is this just more of your schtick to complain about everything?
I'm bagging on the stupid sounding term, not the fact that a ball needs to be caught.
Get it? -
You can count on me to start the best threads. Same as always.chuck said:
This is a perfect fight. A lot going on, action in every direction, but nobody really getting hit too hard...if at all. Like MMA with oversize gloves and ankle weights.RaceBannon said:
More of what makes HH a top ten internet site for UW athletics. -
Kind of like UW throwback uniformsMikeDamone said:
It's old timey, but isn't. It like The Rock Pizza in a strip mall. They makes it look an old brick building interior in a warehouse district, but it's brand new and fake.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Line to gain is old timey. I like that.MikeDamone said:
So not a shuffle? Or a shuttle? How about the line to gain?greenblood said:Shovel because the pass mimics the motion of tossing out shoveled dirt.
