Success Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 9 minutes ago, ricko1112 said: The receiver must control the ball after initial contact with the ground. That's what the rule says. Clearly, James lost control. His left hand was totally off the ball and the ball was resting on the ground. We can argue it's a dumb rule, but it's the rule. You never see the ball resting on the ground. It’s really not clear. I’d say it probably hit the ground, but it wasn’t enough to overturn a called TD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 1 minute ago, Success said: You never see the ball resting on the ground. It’s really not clear. I’d say it probably hit the ground, but it wasn’t enough to overturn a called TD. That's the problem, there is no view that clearly shows the ball is on or touching the ground. Everyone assumes it is or touched because of the movement of the ball, but there is no clear view that shows it on or touching the ground. The rules for instant replay to overturn a call on the field say that the have to clearly have visual proof that the opposite happened of what was called on the field. That's why it should not have been overturned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 14 minutes ago, Success said: You never see the ball resting on the ground. It’s really not clear. I’d say it probably hit the ground, but it wasn’t enough to overturn a called TD. It is sort of like a puck tangled up in the pads of a goalie and not visible. You can't assume it went in the net based on where you think it was in the pad. Unless.....Pats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livinginthepast Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 54 minutes ago, ricko1112 said: The receiver must control the ball after initial contact with the ground. That's what the rule says. Clearly, James lost control. His left hand was totally off the ball and the ball was resting on the ground. We can argue it's a dumb rule, but it's the rule. Not true at all. The ball is bobbled but you can see it spin in James grasp (indicating it is still in contact with his left wrist). Even though it rolls out of his left hand his wrist is squeezing it into his right hand which is cupping the ball and cradles it. At no time does the ball fall through the hands and bounce on the ground. None of the replays showed this happening. The simple fact is that there is no definitive proof to show the ball hitting the turf and therefore the play should have stood as called. If we had a better view from the end zone cam near the goal posts then it would be definitive what happened. But that camera angle is obscured by Harmon and Smith Schuster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryMadman Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 1 hour ago, ricko1112 said: The receiver must control the ball after initial contact with the ground. That's what the rule says. Clearly, James lost control. His left hand was totally off the ball and the ball was resting on the ground. We can argue it's a dumb rule, but it's the rule. He did maintain control when he had 2 feet and 1 knee contact the ground then he turned his body and stretched the ball out over the goal line. NFL screwed up, plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 (edited) I want Patriots/NFL/Rules shill to explain why this was ok. I'm sure there's a good reason! Pats would 9-5 and not 11-3 without this call and yesterdays calls. Edited December 18, 2017 by horned dogs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niagara Bill Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 I hope that someone in the review booth made lots of money from some bookie on this one, Hard to get upset with this type of NFL garbage when you expect it from the officials and the league in big moments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jasovon Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 If it's a patriot doing that for the go ahead TD it's called a TD and that is exactly why ratings are down. No consistency and the refs are now in prime time deciding games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 20 minutes ago, horned dogs said: I want Patriots/NFL/Rules shill to explain why this was ok. I'm sure there's a good reason! Pats would 9-5 and not 11-3 without this call and yesterdays calls. No way Cooks had control of the ball at the end of the catch. It hit the ground as he rolled over it. If this was a catch, then the Steelers should have won yesterday; even if the ball touched the ground, which there is no conclusive evidence that it did. A little consistency on the part of the NFL officiating would be nice. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 1 minute ago, Happy Gilmore said: No way Cooks had control of the ball at the end of the catch. It hit the ground as he rolled over it. If this was a catch, then the Steelers should have won yesterday; even if the ball touched the ground, which there is no conclusive evidence that it did. A little consistency on the part of the NFL officiating would be nice. I asked Dean Blandino for an explanation but I'm not holding my breath. I'm expecting crickets much like Dunkirk Don when he has no answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, horned dogs said: I asked Dean Blandino for an explanation but I'm not holding my breath. I'm expecting crickets much like Dunkirk Don when he has no answers. Both Blandino and Mike Periera are siding with the NFL officiating on this play. Just look at their twitter feeds. Dean BlandinoVerified account @DeanBlandino 15h15 hours ago More Why the crew in #NEvsPIT got the call right 484 replies388 retweets565 likes Reply 484 Retweet 388 Like 565 Mike PereiraVerified account @MikePereira 16h16 hours ago More People are saying a runner breaking the plane causes the ball to become dead…which is true. BUT the receiver does not become a runner until he completes the process of the catch. TOTALLY DIFFERENT 1,724 replies2,129 retweets3,831 likes Reply 1.7K Retweet 2.1K Like 3.8K Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterpan Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 32 minutes ago, horned dogs said: I want Patriots/NFL/Rules shill to explain why this was ok. I'm sure there's a good reason! Pats would 9-5 and not 11-3 without this call and yesterdays calls. 8-6 actually. The Jets were robbed of a potential game winning TD on a fumble that wasn't. Bills should be playing for the division title next week, but the NFL won't allow that to happen . 8 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said: Both Blandino and Mike Periera are siding with the NFL officiating on this play. Just look at their twitter feeds. Dean BlandinoVerified account @DeanBlandino 15h15 hours ago More Why the crew in #NEvsPIT got the call right 484 replies388 retweets565 likes Reply 484 Retweet 388 Like 565 Mike PereiraVerified account @MikePereira 16h16 hours ago More People are saying a runner breaking the plane causes the ball to become dead…which is true. BUT the receiver does not become a runner until he completes the process of the catch. TOTALLY DIFFERENT 1,724 replies2,129 retweets3,831 likes Reply 1.7K Retweet 2.1K Like 3.8K By Mike pereiras reasoning it's impossible for a wr to fumble because he doesn't complete the catch until he is tackled. The Steele's dude completed the process of the catch when he turned to reach the ball over the plan. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 5 minutes ago, peterpan said: 8-6 actually. The Jets were robbed of a potential game winning TD on a fumble that wasn't. Bills should be playing for the division title next week, but the NFL won't allow that to happen . This season has to be one of the great travesties ever in terms of one team benefiting from changed calls in their favor. Just awful that Patriots get all three. I promise if this happens to the Bills they will lose another fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricko1112 Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, LarryMadman said: He did maintain control when he had 2 feet and 1 knee contact the ground then he turned his body and stretched the ball out over the goal line. NFL screwed up, plain and simple. James lost control when the ball hit the ground. Knees and feet don't matter, according to the current rules. Pretty cut and dry. I'm not saying it's a good rule, but the NFL makes these rules for a reason. They've had several opportunities to change them, but haven't. Even the Tuck Rule took a decade to change. Edited December 18, 2017 by ricko1112 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 13 minutes ago, ricko1112 said: James lost control when the ball hit the ground. Knees and feet don't matter, according to the current rules. Pretty cut and dry. I'm not saying it's a good rule, but the NFL makes these rules for a reason. They've had several opportunities to change them, but haven't. Even the Tuck Rule took a decade to change. Pretty cut and dry looking at the picture with "Ball comes loose", huh? I'll go ahead and make my own picture with "Ball stays secure" and call that cut and dry. Bottom line is there was no way the replay officials could determine if the ball hit the ground. Looking at the replay many times, the receiver shifted the ball from his left hand, over to his right hand and rests on his fingers. The slight spin of the ball indicates this transfer took place, IMO. If it hit the ground, I think you would see more of a bobble, which this was not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 20 minutes ago, ricko1112 said: James lost control when the ball hit the ground. Knees and feet don't matter, according to the current rules. Pretty cut and dry. I'm not saying it's a good rule, but the NFL makes these rules for a reason. They've had several opportunities to change them, but haven't. Even the Tuck Rule took a decade to change. Ok, now show the photo of the ball actually touching the ground, which is what was supposed to be required in order for a call on the field to be overturned. I will wait......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 56 minutes ago, peterpan said: 8-6 actually. The Jets were robbed of a potential game winning TD on a fumble that wasn't. Bills should be playing for the division title next week, but the NFL won't allow that to happen . By Mike pereiras reasoning it's impossible for a wr to fumble because he doesn't complete the catch until he is tackled. The Steele's dude completed the process of the catch when he turned to reach the ball over the plan. If a receiver gets the ball while going to the ground it is impossible for him to fumble. Either he holds the ball through the fall or it is incomplete. if you want to argue it’s a bad rule, go ahead. But denying it’s the actual rule is not productive. 1 minute ago, apuszczalowski said: Ok, now show the photo of the ball actually touching the ground, which is what was supposed to be required in order for a call on the field to be overturned. I will wait......... I see a hand above and the hand beside has pinky and index visible. Is the argument that his middle and ring are underneath and the only thing the call contacts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 (edited) 19 minutes ago, NoSaint said: If a receiver gets the ball while going to the ground it is impossible for him to fumble. Either he holds the ball through the fall or it is incomplete. if you want to argue it’s a bad rule, go ahead. But denying it’s the actual rule is not productive. Is somebody on here arguing that it isn't a rule? I haven't seen it. I see 90% of the people arguing that they hate the same stupid rules and the league continuing to do damage control all the time and not having change should be made. Edited December 18, 2017 by horned dogs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 1 hour ago, peterpan said: 8-6 actually. The Jets were robbed of a potential game winning TD on a fumble that wasn't. The other crime on the ASJ play is Butler not getting a flag or being ejected for manhandling the official. Add "pushing an official is not a penalty for Pats*" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 15 minutes ago, NoSaint said: I see a hand above and the hand beside has pinky and index visible. Is the argument that his middle and ring are underneath and the only thing the call contacts? Do you see green directly below the football indicating the ball is on the ground? Cause I see a hand there and no visible indication that the ball is actually sitting on the ground. Again, I await the photo showing the ball sitting directly on the ground, which is what needs to be seen in order to determine that the call on the field must be overturned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts