While I disagree with the call. He had clear possession, turned and extended to the end zone. That is a football move. The problem came earlier. After an entire game of controlling the clock the steelers went 3 and out twice giving the ball back to the patriots. Nobody in football seems to have enough balls to put their foot on the patriots neck and beat them. They all try to coast to a win. I hate both teams, but I hate the Patriots more.
Furious_E said:In reply to 1988RedT2 :
When the receiver is considered down has nothing to do with it. He did not establish possession before going to the ground, nor did he maintain of the ball going to the ground. Therefore, no catch.
On this point, you and I simply will not agree. He CLEARLY made the catch and had possession of the ball all the way to the ground. Only after his entire body was laying on the ground did the ball hit the ground and come out of his grasp.
D2W said:While I disagree with the call. He had clear possession, turned and extended to the end zone. That is a football move.
And that's the real debate. Does leaning to the endzone count as a football move or not.
If it does, and the exact same play happened at the 50 yard line, (and he was not touched) he could stand back up and run with the reveived ball. The most important thing is that it's a reception (or not) in the normal field of play or the endzone. You can't have different definitions of possiession depending on where the ball is caught.
1988RedT2 said:Furious_E said:In reply to 1988RedT2 :
When the receiver is considered down has nothing to do with it. He did not establish possession before going to the ground, nor did he maintain of the ball going to the ground. Therefore, no catch.
On this point, you and I simply will not agree. He CLEARLY made the catch and had possession of the ball all the way to the ground. Only after his entire body was laying on the ground did the ball hit the ground and come out of his grasp.
FWIW, reading the NFL rules, possession INCLUDES the ball and the player hitting the ground- and IF the ball is controlled or not.
Again, if that play happened at the 3 yard line, would it be a catch or not?
I'm a fan of neither team. But I'm done with the NFL.
The inconveniences in rules, favoritism towards teams, the scandals, and the propensity for life changing injuries has all but turned me away from football entirely.
It can be so exciting, and I'm going to miss it dearly, but I can't do football anymore.
alfadriver said:D2W said:While I disagree with the call. He had clear possession, turned and extended to the end zone. That is a football move.
And that's the real debate. Does leaning to the endzone count as a football move or not.
If it does, and the exact same play happened at the 50 yard line, (and he was not touched) he could stand back up and run with the reveived ball. The most important thing is that it's a reception (or not) in the normal field of play or the endzone. You can't have different definitions of possiession depending on where the ball is caught.
I agree, and I think that is a fundamental problem that people are having with the referees interpretation of the rules. I believe that if he had done that exact same move except toward the sideline on say the 10, it would have been ruled a catch.
In reply to D2W :
Actually, I don't think it would be a catch. When you read the replay rules- regardless of the "football move"- he was clearly a "Player Going to the Ground" and since the ball hit the ground as part of that, "Ball touches ground" is also in play. So being a player going to the ground means he has to keep control of the ball the entire time he is hitting the ground- regardless of what touched. And the "football move" looks to only apply if he could be considered a runner, getting two feet down and making a move.
Here's a quote of the replay rules for what a catch is (bold is from the NFL, not me):
ARTICLE 3. COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS
A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
- secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
- touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
- maintains control of the ball after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, until he has the ball long enough to clearly become a runner. A player has the ball long enough to become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps (see 3-2-7-Item 2).
Note: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.
If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch.
Item 1. Player Going to the Ground. 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.
Item 2. Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, or the pass is incomplete.
Item 3. End Zone Catches. The requirements for a catch in the end zone are the same as the requirements for a catch in the field of play.
Note: In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, after which contact by a defender causes the ball to become loose before the runner is down by contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goal line prior to the loss of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.
Item 4. Ball Touches Ground. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control of it, it is a catch, provided that the player continues to maintain control.
Item 5. Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.
Item 6. Carried Out of Bounds. If a player, who is in possession of the ball, is held up and carried out of bounds by an opponent before both feet or any part of his body other than his hands touches the ground inbounds, it is a completed or intercepted pass. It is not necessary for the player to maintain control of the ball when he lands out of bounds.
ARTICLE 4. INCOMPLETE PASS
Any forward pass (legal or illegal) is incomplete and the ball is dead immediately if the pass strikes the ground or goes out of bounds. An incomplete pass is a loss of down, and the ball returns to the previous spot.
Note: If there is any question whether a forward pass is complete, intercepted, or incomplete, it is to be ruled incomplete.
In reply to alfadriver :
Was just about to post that myself. Relevant points:
1. James is clearly "going to the ground."
"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."
"A player has the ball long enough to become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps "
At no point in that sequence of making the diving catch was he ever upright, and certainly had not established himself as a runner. He is in no way capable of avoiding contact, does not tuck the ball, does not turn upfield, does not take additional steps after coming down with the ball. He extends as he is in the process of going down. By the above definition, that is not a football move.
Therefore...
2. "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."
Relevant portion in bold. Doesn't matter that the knees hit first, the second the ball hits the ground it pops loose. That is not maintaining control.
BoostedBrandon said:I'm a fan of neither team. But I'm done with the NFL.
The inconveniences in rules, favoritism towards teams, the scandals, and the propensity for life changing injuries has all but turned me away from football entirely.
It can be so exciting, and I'm going to miss it dearly, but I can't do football anymore.
So what's changed in the past years that made you done with it? I disagree with you about the favoritism towards teams...I just don't really see it...but odd rules and life changing injuries have always been a part of the game... What's different now?
In reply to Klayfish :
I won't say the game has changed so much, but I think I have. It didn't happen overnight, but it's a lot of factors that added up.
Last play of the game looked like Big Ben stole a play out of Russell Wilsons hand book i was just amazed the Pats got the call in Pittsburg (even thou it was the correct one)!
I won't comment on the catch or not the catch (I don't think he possessed the ball, but whatever), but I will ask a question:
In these days of modern electronics and sensing equipment, why is soooooo much still left up to the refs? How hard would it be to have a little electronic doohickey in the ball, coupled with some sensors around the field, that could show you the exact path of the ball in three dimensions at all time? Or electronic monitoring of sidelines? It would sure make spotting the ball and sideline calls a lot easier.
In reply to fasted58 :
I totally agree, and as I said above the Steelers lost this game on the two possesions before this one. If you want to beat the Patriots you need to take it from them.
Its also interesting in the video where the vice president of officiating says "Rothlisburger completes a pass to James ..." Completes a pass! That's a catch isn't it? Seems like everybody is confused.
In reply to Klayfish :
I'm done with it because the NFL doesn't seem to improve or want to improve things so there are less wonky rulings and less dead or broken players.
In reply to glenzo654 :
Pats get the call no matter where they play and no matter if it's the right call.
yupididit said:In reply to glenzo654 :
Pats get the call no matter where they play and no matter if it's he right call.
Embrace the dark side!!!
Nope, I'm a salty Steelers fan!
He caught the ball, had both hands on it when his knee hit the ground, reached across the goal line and broke the plane of the goal line.
This is not unlike the Raiders/Patriots game in the snow where Mr Brady fumbled and it was not a fumble.
Watching that play and typing this post is pretty much 100% of the time I have spent on pro football this year. They lost me a while ago.
T.J. said:It was totally clear to me that that was not a catch by their silly rules. I thought it was funny that the announcers seemed shocked. Have they not watched a football game before? It was an incomplete pass (under the silly rules, not by common sense). That being said, Tomlin then went on to make the most boneheaded coaching decisions I think I've ever witnessed.
That was a tough game for me since those are two of my least favorite teams and I usually root against both of them. Tomlin should be tarred and feathered. Does he think OT is still sudden death? The fake spike play might have worked against the other NFL teams, but the one team in the league that I know would be ready for it is the Pats. Stupid call.
Whoa. Interesting choice of words there. Wonder if they would be brought out for use regarding any other coach. White sheets for sale on aisle six.
Missed the game, but saw the replay. Now that's he's retired, Calvin Johnson probably has some time and could explain this rule. It was dumb them, it was dumb when it dinged the Cowboys (even though I hate Dez Bryant more than all the other Cowboys, whom I hate more than any other team in football), and it was dumb in this case too.
But it is the rule . . .
Actually it was called the Calvin Johnson rule, after it cost him a couple touchdowns and the Lions victory in those games.. Still doesn't make it any less dumb. Probably showing my age but I remember when the ground couldn't cause a fumble, back in the early 80's i think..
I’ve said it when “questionable calls” led to a Steelers win; I’ll say the same when it leads to a Steelers loss:
There will always be questionable calls. You’ve gotta fight through that E36 M3 and win the game.
I only caught the last half, but the play-calling on both offense and defense by the Steelers was HORRIBLE, and neither the offense nor the defense were making adjustments at the line.
I was calling every play before it happened (much to my wife’s chagrin.)
You can’t let a 5’6” dude cover Gronk. You can’t lean on Bell to carry 90% of the workload, and you sure as E36 M3 can’t run a slant into insane coverage in the endzone when you’re down by 3 with seconds left in the game.
We could’ve spiked the ball, kicked the FG, and gone into OT, run a fade; ANYTHING but a game-losing INT with seconds left.
Regardless of the TD call, we lost the game. Plain & simple.
You'll need to log in to post.
