The Pittsburgh Steelers dominated in an impressive 26-18 win over the struggling New York Giants on “Monday Night Football,” but the score could’ve been even more disparate if not for one slightly controversial play.
Steelers wide receiver George Pickens appeared to make an impressive touchdown catch in the back right corner of the end zone in the second quarter, but it was ruled incomplete because he did not get both feet down inbounds.
However, NFL punditry lit up online with debate over whether the catch should’ve stood because Pickens got his right foot down twice.
The league stipulates that a player must have both feet or a single elbow, knee, thigh, shin or buttocks down inbounds for a play to be considered a touchdown catch.
It seems ridiculous that getting the same foot down twice — a tough thing to do while being forced out of bounds — is not considered two-foot inbounds.
Pittsburgh quarterback Russell Wilson seemed to agree post-game.
“We get the same foot down twice, and it’s clear one and then another one, number two, it’s almost like you get a knee down, and it counts as a touchdown. And getting two rights [feet], maybe it should count. But I don’t know,” Wilson said.
A rule change will unlikely be considered because this type of play is so rare, and it didn’t happen in a playoff or playoff-affecting game.
But while we’re at it, why not reevaluate the force-out rule? Under the old rules (changed after the 2008 season), a catch would’ve been called complete if a defender pushed him out of bounds before he could get both feet down.
The old force-out rule would’ve benefitted Pickens in Monday’s contest and eliminated the two-feet controversy, especially since the officials initially ruled it a touchdown.
Granted, reviving the force-out rule could raise more questions than answers. But in hindsight, it seemed a lot simpler than the 2010 “Calvin Johnson rule,“ which led to the “completing the process of the catch” phrase fans hear a lot nowadays.
Pickens has had two touchdowns called back Monday for failing to complete the process. Perhaps the process needs to be reevaluated yet again.
