Steelers vs. Patriots

[Perry Turtle]

1 minute ago, Avisan said:

You guys aren't thinking straight about this.

 

He was going to the ground as part of the process of making the catch.  He dives for it-- he HAS to maintain possession throughout.  His hand is under the ball, but it moves and touches the ground slightly-- the ground has officially helped him control the ball, which invalidates the catch.

 

It was the right call.  Painful, but the right call.

The problem is that the "complete the process of the catch" is an ill-defined crap rule.  The guy moved the ball into his body, extended forward, but didn't have control or possession?  It's ridiculous.  That was a catch, he had possession before he extended his hands.

 

Fans pay to see plays like this.  They don't pay to watch 70 year old accountants in stripped shirts squinting at a replay over and over, trying to find a slight error to get their big moment to overturn a play made by a real athlete.

 

And despite the total BS this rule has called in the past, the ivory-tower executives have done nothing to fix it.  Screw the NFL, if you give reason to believe that your league is corrupt, people are going to believe that it is corrupt.

 

[Happy]

1 minute ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Huh?

 

SF beat TEN on a last second FG

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Just now, Happy Gilmore said:

 

SF beat TEN on a last second FG

Just saw thanks 

[Avisan]

Just now, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

 

my thought was he had possession, reached across the goal line (TD right there) with the ball in his hands and came down on he ball IN the end zone and it bobbled some from coming down on it?

 

why is it that it was always my understanding that the ball crossing the goal line was a TD?

 

is this a new rule or are pockets being laced once again for the cheaters**? some want to be snide about commenting on not watching anymore, but you have to admit, seeing **** like that has ruined the nfl. they suck for that call, big time.

He was going to ground, so he hadn't completed the catch.  He dove for it, and didn't make a move under his own power that interrupted his going to the ground.

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

2 minutes ago, Avisan said:

Not until he completes the catch.  Because he dove for it, he needs to maintain possession all the way through the catch.  It's the exact same rule as if he caught the pass in the endzone.  There's no magical exception for getting possession of the ball outside the endzone and bringing it inside-- he needs to maintain possession through the catch.

Thats why it is a stupid bad rule.

[RyanC883]

7 minutes ago, Avisan said:

You guys aren't thinking straight about this.

 

He was going to the ground as part of the process of making the catch.  He dives for it-- he HAS to maintain possession throughout.  His hand is under the ball, but it moves and touches the ground slightly-- the ground has officially helped him control the ball, which invalidates the catch.

 

It was the right call.  Painful, but the right call.

 

no, it's not.  Replay does not make a call, the call on the field stands unless there is overwhelming evidence it was wrong.  There is no such evidence.  Therefore, the replay call was 100% wrong and would not go in favor of any team but the Pats*****

[Avisan]

Just now, horned dogs said:

Thats why it is a stupid bad rule.

It's a CONSISTENT rule.  Otherwise simply getting possession in the endzone on a diving catch would be a TD.  There's no magic exception for starting the catch at the 1 yard line.

[Doc]

This isn't your typical "falling to the ground" catch.  He caught the ball and stretched-out to score, broke the plane (at which point the play is dead), and then the ball touched the ground.  Should have stood as a TD. 

Edited December 18, 2017 by Doc

[Buffalo Barbarian]

7 minutes ago, Avisan said:

You guys aren't thinking straight about this.

 

He was going to the ground as part of the process of making the catch.  He dives for it-- he HAS to maintain possession throughout.  His hand is under the ball, but it moves and touches the ground slightly-- the ground has officially helped him control the ball, which invalidates the catch.

 

It was the right call.  Painful, but the right call.

 

He did maintain possession, at no point did he lose the ball.

 

 

[Bing Bong]

 

Edited December 18, 2017 by PetermanThrew5Picks

[WhoTom]

16 minutes ago, nkreed said:

There is no CLEAR evidence that his hand wasn't under the ball!

 

Agreed. Inconclusive - let it stand.

 

 

[Perry Turtle]

2 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

 

my thought was he had possession, reached across the goal line (TD right there) with the ball in his hands and came down on he ball IN the end zone and it bobbled some from coming down on it?

 

why is it that it was always my understanding that the ball crossing the goal line was a TD?

 

is this a new rule or are pockets being laced once again for the cheaters**? some want to be snide about commenting on not watching anymore, but you have to admit, seeing **** like that has ruined the nfl. they suck for that call, big time.

The problem is that there are two rules for crossing the goal line based on a run or pass and the idiots and morons who run the league have never fixed it.

[Avisan]

Just now, Doc said:

This isn't your typical "falling to the ground" catch.  He caught the ball and stretched-out to score, broke the plane, and then the ball touched the ground.  Should have stood as a TD. 

Stretching out to score in no way interrupted his going to the ground, though, which is why he needs to maintain possession.

[RyanC883]

1 minute ago, Avisan said:

It's a CONSISTENT rule.  Otherwise simply getting possession in the endzone on a diving catch would be a TD.  There's no magic exception for starting the catch at the 1 yard line.

 

YEp, such as CONSISTENT rule that the Refs called it a TD, and it took MINUTES for the review, and even the announcers couldn't figure it out.  Very consistent rule.  Oh, wait, there is a consistent rule: the call on the field prevails unless there is overwhelming evidence.  There isn't.  

[Success]

Good rule and call.  Romeo was right - Ben has to throw a fade on the last play.

 

I’ve never had anything consistently sicken me like the pats.

[stuvian]

he had possession when the ball broke the plane.  Its a TD

[Wayne Cubed]

1 minute ago, Avisan said:

HE NEEDS TO MAINTAIN POSSESSION.  He was going to the ground as part of making the catch, so he needs to hang onto the ball throughout the whole process.  The moment the ball shifted, rocked, and the point touched the ground, the ground helped him control the ball.  No catch.

 

He has possession otherwise he wouldn’t be able to extend the ball. Someone who doesn’t have possession can’t extend a ball. As soon as the ball crosss the goal line, it’s dead if someone has possession. The part of him bringing it into his body hen extending it is him making the catch.

 

And, the ball can shift and rock and still be a catch, you are aware of that right?

[RyanC883]

1 minute ago, Avisan said:

Stretching out to score in no way interrupted his going to the ground, though, which is why he needs to maintain possession.

 

once the ball crosses the plane it's a TD.  Plain and simple.  He caught it before he crossed the plane, he could throw the ball out of his hands after he crosses the plane.  He had possession prior.  End of discussion.  It's a TD.  Doesn't matter what happens after the ball crosses the plane.  

[row_33]

No point trying to figure it out

 

they just make up the call in the replay booth as they want to

 

 

[Avisan]

1 minute ago, RyanC883 said:

 

YEp, such as CONSISTENT rule that the Refs called it a TD, and it took MINUTES for the review, and even the announcers couldn't figure it out.  Very consistent rule.  Oh, wait, there is a consistent rule: the call on the field prevails unless there is overwhelming evidence.  There isn't.  

They figured it out as soon as the refs stayed under the booth for more than 20 seconds.  It was the right call.  Ball rocks, point hits the ground, ground assisted the catch.