NFL Week 15 Thread

[JujuFish]

Again, the issue is that he was falling when he started to make the catch which means, per the rules, the catch isn't complete until after he hits the ground. If he had made the catch and then fell towards the endzone then yes, the play would have been over the moment the ball crossed the plane. You can argue with the rule but the refs made the correct call on the field.

The rule is as follows:

A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

James was obviously going to the ground, because he had to in order to make the catch. He then maintained control of the ball after his initial contact with the ground, just as the rule requires. Thus, the pass is complete, and the TD is made the moment the tip of the ball breaks the plane of the endzone.

 

[Darwin333]

The rule is as follows:


James was obviously going to the ground, because he had to in order to make the catch. He then maintained control of the ball after his initial contact with the ground, just as the rule requires. Thus, the pass is complete, and the TD is made the moment the tip of the ball breaks the plane of the endzone.

The ball touched the ground when he lost control of it. It really is that simple, unless your definition of "initial contact with the ground" is any body part whatsoever touching the ground which is obviously not the intent of the rule nor how it is read/applied.

In your interpretation of the rule a receiver can have possession of the ball for a quarter second in the endzone and as long as some part of them contacts the ground regardless of what happens afterward it's a touchdown.

 

[emperus]

I'm not even sure why there is a debate about that Steeler "non-catch". It seems that this has been the rule forever. A player must control the ball after hitting the ground if he is going to the ground while making the catch (Basically, after the catch, you must be able to hand the ball to the ref (without the ball ever touching the ground or moving if it does touch the ground, (simply put)). And until he has control of the ball, crossing the plane of the end zone doesn't come into play. And honestly, it's a pretty good rule. The objectivity of it takes the subjectivity out of the call and makes it fairer for all involved.

 

[BUTCH1]

The rule is as follows:


James was obviously going to the ground, because he had to in order to make the catch. He then maintained control of the ball after his initial contact with the ground, just as the rule requires. Thus, the pass is complete, and the TD is made the moment the tip of the ball breaks the plane of the endzone.

But the BALL must "survive the ground", in other words yes, the ball can touch the ground as long as the player as his hand(s) under it and there is no movement when it contacts the ground. In this case neither were true, as he sung it over the line the ball contacted the ground without his hands under it and there was movement as well, no catch. Personally, I don't like it for the simple reason that a running back can shove the ball across the line and it makes zero difference what happens to it afterwards, it's a TD.

 

[Capt Caveman]

The rule is as follows:


James was obviously going to the ground, because he had to in order to make the catch. He then maintained control of the ball after his initial contact with the ground, just as the rule requires. Thus, the pass is complete, and the TD is made the moment the tip of the ball breaks the plane of the endzone.

Thanks for letting everyone know that you don't know the rule.

 

[JujuFish]

But the BALL must "survive the ground", in other words yes, the ball can touch the ground as long as the player as his hand(s) under it and there is no movement when it contacts the ground. In this case neither were true, as he sung it over the line the ball contacted the ground without his hands under it and there was movement as well, no catch. Personally, I don't like it for the simple reason that a running back can shove the ball across the line and it makes zero difference what happens to it afterwards, it's a TD.

The play is already over by the time the ball touches the ground because it is a TD as soon as it crosses the plane of the endzone. It doesn't need to survive anything, because the player already maintained control through his initial contact with the ground.

 

[Capt Caveman]

The play is already over by the time the ball touches the ground because it is a TD as soon as it crosses the plane of the endzone. It doesn't need to survive anything, because the player already maintained control through his initial contact with the ground.

And that's where you're wrong again. No, it's not a TD when it crosses that plane b/c he's not a runner yet but still in the process of completing a reception. Have to be trolling b/c you can't be this stupid.

 

[JujuFish]

And that's where you're wrong again. No, it's not a TD when it crosses that plane b/c he's not a runner yet but still in the process of completing a reception. Have to be trolling b/c you can't be this stupid.

He's not in the process. Did you even read the rule I posted? He maintained control of the ball after his initial contact with the ground. That is literally the requirement in the rulebook. If you're going to argue, at least back it up.

Have to be trolling b/c you can't be this stupid.

 

[13Gigatons]

All these stupid rules are really killing the game. A half a catch is still a catch. In one game they called back a TD because the receiver bobble the ball ever so slightly. I'd prefer more exciting high scoring games.

 

[glenn1]

Don't look now but in a "down" season Drew Brees is about to break the mighty Sam Bradford's single season completion percentage record. He's currently at 71.8% completions on 478 attempts and still on pace for 4,400 yards for the season.

 

[Capt Caveman]

He's not in the process. Did you even read the rule I posted? He maintained control of the ball after his initial contact with the ground. That is literally the requirement in the rulebook. If you're going to argue, at least back it up.

Have to be trolling b/c you can't be this stupid.

https://twitter.com/NFLFootballOps/status/942559627295764480

Yeah, the NFL is trolling. So, you must be stupid. But then again, aren't you the idiot that thinks Peyton Manning is the GOAT?

Please don't post anything about football, you embarrass yourself.

Even Eli thinks the NFL catch rule is clear and it was an incomplete - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ning-likes-the-catch-rule-i-think-it-is-clear

 

[TeeJay1952]

NFL thinks it good that we talk about the play.
I think it sucks to be 65 and see something, have it talked about by announcers and then a unknown voice that I don't hear make ruling.
I thought I liked instant replay but 3 minutes before extra point attempt while reviewed on every scoring play deteriorates my interest.

 

[BUTCH1]

He's not in the process. Did you even read the rule I posted? He maintained control of the ball after his initial contact with the ground. That is literally the requirement in the rulebook. If you're going to argue, at least back it up.

Have to be trolling b/c you can't be this stupid.

What is appears your not understanding is that it's irrelevant that he had control as he was falling + when his knee hit. If he had caught the ball say 3-4 yards out and was in the process of running it into the EZ it might be called a TD if he then falls and the ball is jarred loose. Here, he catches it, then falls to one knee, and lunges it across the line all with the ball held extended from his body. The ball is most defiantly jarred loose by it contacting the ground so I'ts ruled incomplete. I don't like the rule's as written and Ref's should be allowed some leeway, (as in this case) but they are not. In any event, there were a number of reasons the Steelers were in that position to begin with. As pointed out by Romo during the game, playing very conservative in the 4th Qtr when Ben + the receivers had great success throughout the game vs the banged-up Patriot defense made no sense to me at all. Ben not Blake Bortles, he's not gonna throw that nutty INT to kill your chance so let him make 1-2 1st downs and keep Brady on the bench. I'd say the same of Ben as I do Brady, he's far too good a QB to be given extra chances to scald your ass late in the game.

 

[JujuFish]

https://twitter.com/NFLFootballOps/status/942559627295764480

Yeah, the NFL is trolling. So, you must be stupid. But then again, aren't you the idiot that thinks Peyton Manning is the GOAT?

Please don't post anything about football, you embarrass yourself.

Even Eli thinks the NFL catch rule is clear and it was an incomplete - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ning-likes-the-catch-rule-i-think-it-is-clear

You're a good example of why people (not everyone, but many) hate Pats fans. It's this condescending bullshit and complete disregard for even the possibility of being in the wrong that just makes you look like a complete asshole. At least Butch is respectable about it. I'd gladly have a beer with him; you're not worth anyone's time.

As for the catch, it doesn't matter how the NFL ops want to interpret it, it doesn't match the way the rule is written. Write it better if that is intended to be incomplete, if you want. He doesn't lose the football until he lunges for the endzone and the ground hitting his elbow jars his hand off the ball. His initial contact with the ground, both feet and a knee, does not do that. He makes contact with the ground, pulls the football in, and then proceeds to make a football move. That is a catch. The football crosses the goal line, TD.

P.S. I will readily admit a bias against the Patriots as I am a Bills fan. We all see what we want to see, and perhaps that's in play here.

 

[Capt Caveman]

You're a good example of why people (not everyone, but many) hate Pats fans. It's this condescending bullshit and complete disregard for even the possibility of being in the wrong that just makes you look like a complete asshole. At least Butch is respectable about it. I'd gladly have a beer with him; you're not worth anyone's time.

As for the catch, it doesn't matter how the NFL ops want to interpret it, it doesn't match the way the rule is written. Write it better if that is intended to be incomplete, if you want. He doesn't lose the football until he lunges for the endzone and the ground hitting his elbow jars his hand off the ball. His initial contact with the ground, both feet and a knee, does not do that. He makes contact with the ground, pulls the football in, and then proceeds to make a football move. That is a catch. The football crosses the goal line, TD.

P.S. I will readily admit a bias against the Patriots as I am a Bills fan. We all see what we want to see, and perhaps that's in play here.

No, it's the fact that haters like you are too stupid to understand a rule that you put in bold and thought you understood. So, even after the NFL tells you that you are wrong, you continue to post over and over that you're right. The rule is written fine it's the fact that you don't understand English grammar.

Here is what you put in bold from the rule book:

A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

What does the until after of the "he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground" mean? Why not just say "on" but instead says "until after"? You don't know or you would have shut up a long time ago. First, you think he's a runner with the ball and bring up the plane of the end zone. Strike one, you're wrong as he's going to the ground for a reception and is not considered a runner. Strike two that you say that when he touches the ground with his knee and elbow that it's a completion, it is not yet. Strike three that you don't understand what until after means.

Photo of James coming down with the ball, the "until after initial contact with the ground" occurs when the ball hits the ground and his left hand comes off the ball. You can see based on the way he is holding the ball that taking his left hand off the ball, he is not able to maintain control of the ball as it makes contact with the ground. Incomplete pass.

 

[JujuFish]

No, it's the fact that haters like you are too stupid to understand a rule that you put in bold and thought you understood. So, even after the NFL tells you that you are wrong, you continue to post over and over that you're right. The rule is written fine it's the fact that you don't understand English grammar.

So in your world, a catcher could lay on the ground for 30 seconds, then let go of the ball, and bam, incomplete pass. Because that passes the same measures you just laid forth.

 

[zinfamous]

So in your world, a catcher could lay on the ground for 30 seconds, then let go of the ball, and bam, incomplete pass. Because that passes the same measures you just laid forth.

was that dude laying the ground for 30 seconds after he was touched while bobbling the ball in his hand, before he secured it?

because yeah, still no catch. I mean, you want to stay honest to this actual situation, right?

I mean, there's many good reasons to hate the Pats and a good number of their fans, but this sure as shit isn't it.

 

[Capt Caveman]

So in your world, a catcher could lay on the ground for 30 seconds, then let go of the ball, and bam, incomplete pass. Because that passes the same measures you just laid forth.

Pull out a stopwatch and let us know how many seconds between his elbow hitting the ground and the ball hitting the ground. How many motions? B/c we know James could stop himself without reaching out with his arms and the football? Time to go take some English grammar classes since you don't understand the words until after. You're not only stupid but can't even tell time.

 

[emperus]

You're a good example of why people (not everyone, but many) hate Pats fans. It's this condescending bullshit and complete disregard for even the possibility of being in the wrong that just makes you look like a complete asshole. At least Butch is respectable about it. I'd gladly have a beer with him; you're not worth anyone's time.

As for the catch, it doesn't matter how the NFL ops want to interpret it, it doesn't match the way the rule is written. Write it better if that is intended to be incomplete, if you want. He doesn't lose the football until he lunges for the endzone and the ground hitting his elbow jars his hand off the ball. His initial contact with the ground, both feet and a knee, does not do that. He makes contact with the ground, pulls the football in, and then proceeds to make a football move. That is a catch. The football crosses the goal line, TD.

P.S. I will readily admit a bias against the Patriots as I am a Bills fan. We all see what we want to see, and perhaps that's in play here.

I hate this equivalence bullshit in any topic. Why should someone admit the possibility of being wrong when they are right? Is it to make you feel better about yourself? This is a silly argument. The rule is written in black and white. No serious person who reads it believes this wasn't called correctly.

A player can't score a touchdown unless they demonstrate control of the ball. So, reaching the ball over the goal line doesn't matter UNTIL the player demonstrates that control. And how does a receiver demonstrate control? VIA the NFL catch rule. And if an element of the catch rule isn't met, there is no control, so no touchdown whether he was in the end zone or not.

Here is a good article on it, read it and you'll probably enjoy the game more.
http://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/...ut-steelers-survive-the-ground-call-was-right

Edit: This is similar to arguing that a receiver who catches the ball with one foot out of bounds actually caught the ball and it should count. No he didn't because that's not what the rules say. If you like the Steelers, you should be more upset that their receivers and QB don't seem to understand the "catch" rules.

 

[purbeast0]

It's clear JujuFish doesn't know the rule.

 

[JujuFish]

It's clear JujuFish doesn't know the rule.

No, I'm just taking it too literally, probably because of my hate for the Pats.

 

[JujuFish]

Pull out a stopwatch and let us know how many seconds between his elbow hitting the ground and the ball hitting the ground. How many motions? B/c we know James could stop himself without reaching out with his arms and the football? Time to go take some English grammar classes since you don't understand the words until after. You're not only stupid but can't even tell time.

Do you enjoy being this stupid?

 

[purbeast0]

No, I'm just taking it too literally, probably because of my hate for the Pats.

No, you don't understand the rule.

 

[JujuFish]

No, you don't understand the rule.

I understand it and I understand why the NFL is making the argument it is making. The argument is that he hasn't finished the process of making the catch until his entire body has finished its momentum to the ground, at which point he did not keep control of the ball and thus it's an incomplete pass. That's just not how the rule is written, in actual words.

 

[Ken g6]

The rule is as follows:


James was obviously going to the ground, because he had to in order to make the catch. He then maintained control of the ball after his initial contact with the ground, just as the rule requires. Thus, the pass is complete, and the TD is made the moment the tip of the ball breaks the plane of the endzone.

That ought to be the rule. But they rule similar catches where the ball is knocked loose by the ground out of bounds as incomplete too.