This is not the first or the last time this rule has been used. The rule is very clear. Your suggestion that the league is trying to help the Patriots win comes across as sour grapes. So when the Patriots have a TD overturned because of this rule, I bet you will be jumping for joy. To that end I am glad the NFL didn't hire you as an official.
You are correct the rule is very clear. Now tell me how Cooks game winning touchdown against Houston counts and this one doesn't. in both cases the balls shifts when the hit the ground in the act of falling "while" catching the ball.
i have the game on the DVR, I looked at it again and it was reviewed. It did hit the ground but that is okay, just a matter of opinion if it moved or not. To me it looked like it was glued to his forearm, but that is just an opinion. Again, if the refs feels that it moves, no TD. All of these plays come down to seeing if there is movement the player can not prevent.
The way the rule is written, it's not a catch. Clearly lost control of it when it hit the ground. It's dumb though. He caught it, took multiple steps including his knee hitting the ground and he made a football move by reaching for the endzone. That should be considered a catch. As for the interception, it's just what people do against the Patriots. They overthink things and believe they have to do something incredible to win the game. They were going to spike the ball then Big Ben saw a matchup he liked an audibled at the last second when he should have just spiked the ball and let them kick a field goal to go to OT.
I agree with this 100% but then ask the question again, why did essentially the same catch count for Cooks against Houston?
The Jesse James drop was clearly not a catch, he never completed the process, the ball hit the ground and that is clearly explained in the rules. He was in mid air when he caught it, so by lounging toward the endzone he screwed himself out of the catch. I was surprised Romo and the other announcer didn't realize that for so long. I said it right away, the second it happened and these guys are sitting there watching the replay over and over without even thinking about it. The Houston play was different. The receiver caught the ball with both feet in touching the ground, he then jumped out of bounds. He completed the process of the catch before jumping out. The fake spike was Ben being stupid. Why take that risk unless you throw a fade so that a pick is not possible? All he had to do is clock it and kick the game tying field goal. Really stupid. Trying to get fancy to appease the ego, I get it, but it's not necessary. I know it would have made you look brilliant against the Patriots to pull that off, but they saw it coming because it's not the first time he's tried that. I'm sure BB already prepped the team on that possibility. So it wasn't miraculous, it was just 3 bad plays by the Steelers.
Because the receiver completed the process of the catch and landed both feet in bounds. After that he was pushed out, but the process had already been completed. If he was still in the air and got his toes in but lost the ball on the way down it would not be a catch, but since he had already landed and then essentially jumped out, it's a completely different situation.
Toronto, I have the Houston game on DVR, and looked it from another angle from the Gif, it looks to me that it does not move, but that is just me. Yes, the rule is clear. Just the dicey part is that within the rule a judgement needs to be made on a few things - is there enough of a move by the player (after two feet) to become a runner, and does the ball move and what caused that movement. These judgments are the things that make it tough and rough on fans as folks will naturally have different opinions when it is a close call. With the above said I think of the three plays we have talked about, Cooks, ASJ, and James, James's movement was the most apparent.
Watching Jimmy G tear it up in SF gives me hope for the first time in years. Belichick is too smart to trade the Pats future for a second round pick. Unless he's planning on retiring with Brady...
He lost control when he hit the ground and it wobbled, the same way James did. He didn't jump out he was pushed in the process of making the catch which means he "must maintain control." Either way this entire argument illustrates one of the biggest problems with this league. they have create a rulebook so convoluted that it's nearly impossible to believe the referees are impartial. The fact it tends to be the same teams getting the benefit of these calls makes it hard to justify spending time and money when you cheer for the other 27 teams. The complete lack of transparency in discplining poor performance by officiating crews does nothing to dispell the feeling that "the shield" is doctoring outcomes.
Only way that was glued to his forearm is with 10 pounds of stickum, now we all now stickum is illegal but, you know, it's the P*ts
I see where you are going Wilkerson, but I think it is a real stretch to say that he voluntarily hopped out and did not have too. Essentially to be able to argue that one is not going to the ground you have to say that I can remain standing after catching the ball. The problem with Cooks he was running to the sideline with a defender behind him. And like James, the pass was in a spot where he really could not remain standing after catching the ball. His momentum was such that he was going out of bounds and he chose to hop out of bounds as opposed to falling down directly. Either way for me, he was not someone that one could demonstrate he could remain upright after he caught the ball. My two cents.
The way the rule is written the call was correct. That being said we can debate until we are blue in the face what is and is not a catch. The NFL should examine it an clarify it this offseason. As for the Pats it is frustrating to continually see them get all the calls and have everything go there way. Many fans have left for various reasons. Red Zone, cutting the cord, anthem protests and not enough younger viewers. People also mention they're just not that interested. I also think it is because of teams like the Patriots,Steelers, Packers, Giants and other continual successful teams. Fans like us or the Lions, Browns Viking, etc we never win. Rarely get to the playoffs or have success. Though we still support our teams and watch them eventually you'll say I'll miss that Pats Steelers game I'm going to do something with my wife and kids.
Very possibly, but you can clearly see it moves from the crook of his elbow and is sliding out of his control.
The Pats don't always get the calls. During the game a penalty was called on Cooks for going out of bounds and then going back in bounds to catch the ball. It was a big play called back. Per the rule this was the right call, but the fact Cooks was pushed out of bounds beyond 5 yards past the line of scrimmage should have been a penalty on the Steelers. It wasn't called. We shouldn't be changing the rules of the game just because you don't like what team benefitted from the rule. If you don't like the catch rule, then tell me how it should be changed exactly. Also if it looks like a catch it is argument doesn't fly. The NFL has a very obvious rule here but many of you simply don't like it because as you say it helped the Pats.
It appears Ben thought it was 2nd down and wanted to spike the ball. When the coaches told him to run a play because it was 3rd down, hence the confusion. Only 1 receiver was out on the play and he was heading into a crowd of Patriots. Ben had played a somewhat flawless game and simply made a critical error at the wrong time. This is the reason for the Steelers losing not the call.
What is he feels Brady truly has 5 more years! Then this would be nightmare for all of you Patriot haters.
I doubt Brady has 5 more years. But I'd rather have 5 more years of Brady after which Brady and Belichick retire than Belichick staying on to coach an elite Garoppolo.
Every game can be picked apart for a call your team didn't get. The Pats get most calls to go their way. This call was the right call. When the Jets played the Pats the Jenkins td non td call was absurd. That is a ridiculous call that went the Pats way. What about Gronk attacking a player who is on the ground and he only gets one game. Anyone else it would've been two. Belichek even admitted it was a bad play. Just a few examples. I'm not calling for the rule to change. The NFL needs to review the rule and make it clear to everyone what the rule is so we have an understanding. Example. Andre Ellington made a catch for the Cardinals. He was stumbling while making the catch. He took ten steps fell to the ground and fumbled the ball. Everyone thought it was a catch and fumble. Upon review it was incomplete because he was falling while making the catch. To me he clearly had control and made the catch but to the NFL since he was falling and didn't complete the catch while falling it was incomplete. If that is going to be the rule make a tape so we know going into 2018. Other examples Dez Bryant's catch and Clavin Johnson one hand catch then having the ball touch the ground while making it. Here is my question for you with this catch. Did James catch the ball tuck it to his body and then move it over the end zone. Yes. To me that is a catch. Going to the ground shouldn't be considered. In the NFL it is. So if this is the definition of the rule just make certain the fans, players, coach's etc know and be consistent with it.
