Steelers vs. Patriots

[Perry Turtle]

8 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

https://deadspin.com/nfls-worst-rule-robs-pittsburgh-of-a-win-over-new-engla-1821372652

 

 

Both his knee and elbow hit the ground before the ball shifts, after breaking the plane.

 

Total crap call.

[PatsFanNH]

1 minute ago, Perry Turtle said:

Both his knee and elbow hit the ground before the ball shifts, after breaking the plane.

 

Total crap call.

It was called correctly. He has to maintain control ALL the way to the ground which includes contact with said ground.

[Augie]

Tony Romo is no Marshall Faulk. 

 

That’s a good thing. 

[Fadingpain]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but shouldn't the play have been over the moment the tip of the ball crossed the plane of the goal line and created a touchdown?

 

Why does the rule governing "completing the catch" supersede the rule saying a TD is scored the moment the plane is crossed?  

 

I guess the theory is no completion of catch = no possession = no one ever crossed the plane to score a TD....but he did cross the plane and 100 out of 100 football fans watching that play thought "TD!" as it unfolded.

What a **** rule.

 

 

[Augie]

1 minute ago, PatsFanNH said:

It was called correctly. He has to maintain control ALL the way to the ground which includes contact with said ground.

I understand (maybe?) the rule, but that was a catch and a touchdown. They need to get back to common sense. If 1,000 people look at that, what is the call? 

[Wayne Cubed]

Just now, PatsFanNH said:

It was called correctly. He has to maintain control ALL the way to the ground which includes contact with said ground.

 

As said before they must stay with the call on the field unless there is indisputable evidence the other way.

 

Could you please kindly show me where the ball touches the ground? Because to me it looks like his hand is under it the whole way. Yes it moves, but it looks like it spins.

[EmotionallyUnstable]

Answer: not if you're a Patriot

[Doc Brown]

1 minute ago, Fadingpain said:

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but shouldn't the play have been over the moment the tip of the ball crossed the plane of the goal line and created a touchdown?

 

Why does the rule governing "completing the catch" supersede the rule saying a TD is scored the moment the plane is crossed?  

 

I guess the theory is no completion of catch = no possession = no one ever crossed the plane to score a TD....but he did cross the plane and 100 out of 100 football fans watching that play thought "TD!" as it unfolded.

What a **** rule.

 

 

Yeah.  That's unfortunately the rule.  I don't know how they simplify it, but something needs to be changed.

[Augie]

1 minute ago, Fadingpain said:

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but shouldn't the play have been over the moment the tip of the ball crossed the plane of the goal line and created a touchdown?

 

Why does the rule governing "completing the catch" supersede the rule saying a TD is scored the moment the plane is crossed?  

 

I guess the theory is no completion of catch = no possession = no one ever crossed the plane to score a TD....but he did cross the plane and 100 out of 100 football fans watching that play thought "TD!" as it unfolded.

What a **** rule.

 

 

Since the knee was down, yes. A catch is like porn, I know it when I see it. I mean, not that....never mind....

[PatsFanNH]

Just now, Fadingpain said:

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but shouldn't the play have been over the moment the tip of the ball crossed the plane of the goal line and created a touchdown?

 

Why does the rule governing "completing the catch" supersede the rule saying a TD is scored the moment the plane is crossed?  

 

I guess the theory is no completion of catch = no possession = no one ever crossed the plane to score a TD....but he did cross the plane and 100 out of 100 football fans watching that play thought "TD!" as it unfolded.

What a **** rule.

 

 

I believe I read on bleacher report the rule states  he much maintain control to the ground even in the end zone.

[Perry Turtle]

Just now, PatsFanNH said:

It was called correctly. He has to maintain control ALL the way to the ground which includes contact with said ground.

When he has possession of the ball and his knee is on the ground he is ALL THE WAY TO THE GROUND.  If he's touched there, the play would be over and the ball spotted inside the one. 

 

Any other definition of 'all the way to the ground' beyond the standard rule of knee, elbow, backside is subjective.  You can't have a different definition of being on the ground for a tackle and a catch.

 

Crap call.

 

[PatsFanNH]

2 minutes ago, Wayne Cubed said:

 

As said before they must stay with the call on the field unless there is indisputable evidence the other way.

 

Could you please kindly show me where the ball touches the ground? Because to me it looks like his hand is under it the whole way. Yes it moves, but it looks like it spins.

The indisputable evidence was the ball moving when he hit the ground. THAT IS OBVIOUS AND EVIDENT TO ANYONE SAW THE GAME! 

3 minutes ago, Augie said:

I understand (maybe?) the rule, but that was a catch and a touchdown. They need to get back to common sense. If 1,000 people look at that, what is the call? 

I agree I thought it was a TD and was going over in ny head.. ok Brady gets 28 seconds on their own 25 with 2 time outs.. ya this is possible.

[PolishDave]

33 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Question:. If you catch a TD or two point conversion, stand over your defender, point at him and laugh, is that unsportsmanlike conduct?

 

Answer: Not if you're just back from suspension for trying to maim someone after a play.

 

I thought the same thing too.   But not surprised they didn't call it - because cheaters.

[Wayne Cubed]

Just now, PatsFanNH said:

The indisputable evidence was the ball moving when he hit the ground. THAT IS OBVIOUS AND EVIDENT TO ANYONE SAW THE GAME! 

 

Whoa think your cap lock is on or something there slick. The ball can move without touching the ground, you know that right? The ball moving isn’t evidence it touched the ground. 

 

Again, show me where the ball touched the ground. From the angle that they keep showing James hand is underneath the ball.

[PatsFanNH]

Just now, Wayne Cubed said:

 

Whoa think your cap lock is on or something there slick. The ball can move without touching the ground, you know that right? The ball moving isn’t evidence it touched the ground. 

 

Again, show me where the ball touched the ground. From the angle that they keep showing James hand is underneath the ball.

Sorry caps on my phone I must have hit the double cap button.  As for your assertion his hand was under it, No one saw that  NO one! Now your changing your argument. He lost control once the ball hit the ground and the ball hit the ground. 

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

Agreed romo is great.

 

The bad ones often get the rules wrong. The good ones often teach great shorthand cheats for understanding the rules but neglect the nuance or situational variations leaving us thing we know when we only really know regular occurrences but not the exceptions. Often our longest threads on refs flow back to the differences between those memorable catch phrases vs the rarely occurring variations (football move or all you have to do is break the goal line in this thread, but even phrases like helmet to helmet were a common issue for a stretch with people over applying the phrase)

What has taken away the discretion or nuances as you noted is the video review. The video of the play is shown in slow motion so what is captured is a sequence in a stream of frames.  I thought that Romo perfectly captured the call. At first he thought it was clearly a catch. Then, when he saw the  shot that indicated otherwise he smartly described it as technically not a catch but a tough a call to make. 

[Augie]

I think he still had his hand under the ball. The ground did NOT make the catch! 

[Kelly the Dog]

28 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

Unfortunately I think you are trying to apply common sense and judgment instead of following the letter of the rule. The rules around catches have become in a lot of ways simplified bright lines to take the refs out of the calls.

 

sideline- you are in or out

 

falling- you basically have to hold it through landing (and practically getting back up) to be safe. There’s no act or moment to seek during what can be complicated tangles of bodies coming down. There’s not much judgment left for the ref. Kept the ball the whole way or lost the ball.

 

When falling the phrase “football move” doesn’t exist in the rule book. You can say it but the ref can’t.

When you are on the sideline, tapping your feet and pulling the ball in is "a football move." It doesn't have to be running although normally it is. It was clearly a catch. 

[4merper4mer]

9 minutes ago, PatsFanNH said:

I believe I read on bleacher report the rule states  he much maintain control to the ground even in the end zone.

Which he did.

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, Kelly the Dog said:

When you are on the sideline, tapping your feet and pulling the ball in is "a football move." It doesn't have to be running although normally it is. It was clearly a catch. 

If it was clearly a catch then why did the announcer in the booth, Romo, say after reviewing the slow motion clip that technically he believed it wasn't a catch? The referee then made the same point in explaining the over-ruling.