There is, in fact, a world of difference both for players and for fans between a man catching a ball before its intended target can get to it, and a man catching a ball because the other guy missed.

I stand by my assertion. Also: no one cares.

While it is true that in sending messages it is possible for both Franco and the British to receive the message, unlike in football where it is not possible for both teams to posses the ball. I refer you here:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intercept

b : to receive (a communication or signal directed elsewhere) usually secretly

Of course one cannot argue that there are several valid definitions of “intercept” listed under the words entry, some of which coincide with your description. However, the person who first coined the football term “interception” obviously chose to use the definition selected above to describe when a defensive player catches a forward pass.

Therefore I reiterated it is semantically correct to refer to an errantly thrown ball that lands right in an opponents hands as an intercepted pass.
And that it is not semantically correct only when the defensive player stands between the passer and the receiver.

Could they have used another term to describe such a play result? Of course. Does there exist definitions of interception such that when applied does not desrcibe such a play result? Also of course. But since there exists a single valid, applicable definition of “interception” that describes any forward pass caught by an opponent interception is semantically valid under the circumstance.

Saying that a secret message was intercepted during WWII is also mislead, because it implies that Franco didn’t get it.

It was intended for ally hands, and ended up in enemy hands. Much in the same way that Payton Manning, a Colt intended, for that ball to end up in another Colt’s hands but wound up in a a Saints player’s hands. Therefore it is semantically correct to refer to an errantly thrown ball that lands right in an opponents hands as an intercepted pass.

In fact, the guy behind might not have actually caught it, but almost caught it. So, nearly an interception, but whatever, still it shouldn’t be called an interception then.

2) Terrible calls at the end zone. Very often a small running back will launch himself over the line of scrimmage. (Nearly as often he is met above the line be the defense and it makes a nice crunch sound.) They even had a commercial where a gold hat guy leaps over a tackler to score.

3) So many of the commercials were absolutely terrible. The LOST influenced commercials were pretty fun though. And the Play Nice Dorito kid was amusing: Slap! “One- keep your hands of my momma, two- keep your hands off my Doritos.”

I don’t know how good they were at selling Doritos or Snickers, but if Target sold Nacho Armor or Betty White, I would buy a bunch of them.

On the other hand, the Charger commercial was really troubling, because it seemed like these guys wanted to be rewarded for basic decency toward their girlfriends. If you do not like something about the way you and your wife or girlfriend interact, MAN UP AND DEAL WITH IT.

Though buying a Dodge Charger instead is an awesomely passive-aggressive alternative.
“Honey, why is there a Dodge Charger in the driveway?”
“BECAUSE YOU MADE ME WEAR A SWEATER TO YOUR PARENTS’ ANNIVERSARY PARTY!”