According to the NFL's interpretation of the rule, a guy who catches the ball, runs 50 yards, and then is tackled and bobbles the ball as he falls to turf = incompletion. I realize it's a ridiculous example, but where is the line? Catch the ball, knee down, extend ball over goal line without being touched = TD. And a lot of fans love to watch a villain like the Pats. Kind of like pro wrestling. You think it's too far off? Just watch Gronk - the gap is closing.
I love how ticky-tack fouls against Gronk are always called but when he mugs someone 20 or 30 yards downfield, it's "incidental contact."
Ok..we’ll keep boycotting the patriots..thanks for giving us permission since you Guys are so much smarter.all knowing & deserving than the rest of us. Stats mean shit to me in this instance.Real life experience rules the day.I don’t know a single non patriot fan who has any interest or respect for the Patriots.You guys can win the next 20 Super Bowls & If it means not watching a championship football game for 2 decades so be it..the strongest form of hatred is disinterest. Pretty soon the only fans that will be left are you guys.Thatll be no fun since it’s all about inflating your egos & inflicting little jabs at every non fan in sight. But go ahead & tell us differently..all knowing,entitled wise one
And that has never happened. What you see every week, is a WR catching the ball near sideline, falling out of bounds and the ball moves in their hand. Every time it gets ruled incomplete. Why should it be a TD when the same happens in the end zone? He's not a runner in that instance. If you catch the ball and lunge forward and then bobble it in your hands when you go to the ground, it's not a catch. It's a terrible rule and makes replays too important, but it's still the rule.
they need an officer of common sense at the league office. "sir was this a touchdown?" [shows him the Steelers/NE play]... common sense officer "uhhh, yeah no shit" ruling on the field stands
jesse james WAS a runner when he caught the ball, turned around, landed on one knee and extended the ball over the goal line. A knee = two feet. It was obviously a blown call and a screw job. it was horseshit
How many times have you seen the exact same play to know that in that instance James is not considered a runner, because he went to the ground? None of the refs considered him a runner, and if you watch the NFL you shouldn't either. For example, an WR can catch the ball in the end zone, take two steps but if the defender slaps the ball out of his hands, it's an incomplete pass. I'm sure not being able to read a rule book has nothing to do with the fact that the Pats were involved. Also throwing from the 5 yard line to a sea of defenders is not the greatest idea ever.
Different scenarios completely. In the 50 yard run after the catch, the receiver in now a runner. In the original scenario the Reciever is going to the ground in the act of making the catch. He never complete the catch as he lost the ball upon contact with the ground. His knee has no bearing on the play. If the teams were reversed and it was a Patriots player who didn't complete the catch and the call was exactly the same. Everyone here would be saying that it's the correct call. Unfortunately, it was.
Ruled a TD. This season. Gave Pats the win ... again. "Brady tags Gronk! AND Down from the top rope he flies to deliver a vicious atomic elbow. Oh no! Belichick grabbed a chair . . ."
No. James completed the catch when his knee hit the ground and he turned to extend the ball. Once it crosses the goal line, it's a TD, and only then does he fall to the ground and bobble the ball. My frustration with the uneven and incredibly tedious and nonsensical application of this rule and the Patriots is that it has now won them three games this season, and I can't help but think that their similarly tedious and nonsensical explanations for deflated footballs has resulted in these decisions going in their favor.
Not a Patriots fan and I agree that they get more calls than any other team in the league but have to disagree with you on the catch. His knee has nothing to do with the play. That would only come into play if the catch was completed and trying to determine if he was down when the knee hits the ground or not. I saw a post earlier that said something along the lines of a knee being the same thing as 2 feet. There wasn't a question about being in bounds, being in the end zone. It was simply about maintaining possession through the ground, which unfortunately, James did not. I still feel the biggest problem is the question of when does the receiver become a runner. Until that is clarified there will be unhappy fans. There is confusion between a receiver in the open field, catch and run scenario and the receiver going to the ground. I doubt the league ever gets it right.
Are we mad about the rule, or that it benefited the Patriots? These types of "going to the ground" evaluations happen all the time every week.The change was put into place to draw a clear line - no longer are we trying to figure out if his 'football move' was complete, then he lost the ball... or was the 'football move' just starting when he lost it... if a receiver is going to the ground as he catches the ball - his #1 priority should be to keep that ball off the ground and stable until he's down. It may not be instinctual, but if the receiver reaches out as he makes a sliding, diving, stumbling catch... he's putting the completion at risk. It looked like a catch and felt like a catch - but clearly wasn't based on the current rule. But, I'd also say this rule swings the other way. To my eyes, this rule is far too generous with some the "amazing" sideline catches you see today. Ultra slow-motion video seems to show guys 'catching' balls while their toes are still grazing the grass... but I swear half of these are a mismatch of facts. Just because a ball has contacted the finger tips of the receiver doesn't feel like a catch to me... you need some kind of grip... and in most cases that seems to happen long after one or both feet have left the field of play. Yet a lot of receivers are making these catches as they go flying out of bounds and manage to do what the PIttsburgh TE could not. I'd love to see a review system where the reviewers are required to watch the play with half the screen covered - declare when a 'catch' is made... then pull the covering off the other half to see if the feet/knees/etc. are still actually in-bounds. And, of course, none of this has anything to do with Roethlisberger's subsequent choke to actually lose the game.
They need to just get rid of reviewing every scoring play. It ruins the game. That was an obvious touchdown. It would not have even been reviewed without the rule that every scoring play needs to be reviewed. Just like the Seferian-Jenkins screw job earlier in the year would not have even been challenged by the Patriots. What a stupid ass policy the automatic review is. The point is to quell controversy but it does the very opposite. You make every single touchdown, even the most obvious, under controversy and scrutiny. Imagine other sports instituting something that freakin stupid: -NBA automatically reviewing every slam dunk and we watch to make sure he didn't make a subtle travel on the way to the basket, or hang onto the rim too long, otherwise its overturned. -Baseball automatically reviewing every home run and we notice during the walk off celebration and he's mauled at home plate his teammates got there a step too early before he touched the plate and it's overturned. other sports wouldn't shoot themselves in the foot like that because it would be a joke. Only the NFL likes something this stupid. That was a freakin TD in every sense of the word, NFL, high school, backyard football, etc. Lets not kid ourselves and talk silly garbage like the referees did
Jetaho, to your first point. The moment the WR turns up field and takes a third step he is a runner and thus he has possession. To your second point, he is going to the ground and needs the third element of maintaining control of the ball through the ground to be credited with possession before he can be credit with a TD.
Yes, if after the yellow ring the ball moves on Cooks, it is an incomplete pass and no TD. It tough to see from the gif as the ball goes into the shade.
Being once an avid trumpet player in my younger days, I was a big fan of Louis Armstrong and Cab Calloway. Sometimes when I am a bit drunk, I have been known to do a little scat singing of my own with my trumpet. When the Blues Brothers had Cab in their movie doing Minnie the Moocher, I was so excited I almost got kicked out of the movie theatre. The Patriots broadcast has not been the same without Gil Santos and Gino Cappelletti. Those two were definitely the best ever in pro football radio broadcast. Even at the darkest hour of Patriot history, I was still an interested fan because of them. I have personally met Gino Cappelletti, who is the nicest guy you will ever meet.
Only an old die hard Patriot fan would ever like or have any sympathy for the Jets. That may explain why you see them all the time.
I remember that play and I was concerned that the TD would have been taken away. I am guessing the review official didn't think there was enough evidence.
