Buttle, Baker was a yard and a half in bounds. His absolute maximum stride length may be a yard and a half. Even if he were to reach that length, he's still going in full force parallel to the sideline. So he would have to change angles/momentum drastically, AND have to displace more than one full stride for that foot to be out of bounds. On forceouts, refs always give the benefit of the doubt to the receiver. 95% of the occations I've witnessed have it like that. I saw a Giants game about a month ago when Amani Toomer caught a lob in the air with half of his body out of bounds, contacted away from the field, didn't get anything in bounds, and they called it a catch. It's the risk of the defender at that point. Horrible call.
Bolded statement is the key. Baker was making a one handed catch and the defender thought he'd be better served laying a hit on him and trying to make him drop the ball. Baker held on. 99 out of 100 times when a player is hit like that near the sidelines and holds on it's correctly ruled a catch.
Hey guys, not for nothing, but I'm more curious as to why this guy was walking around the endzone with a trash-can on his head.... And by the way, the game should not have come down to Baker being in or out of bounds. The team played like shit for basically 90% of the game, and if you take away the ST play, about 98% of the game. The way the Jets played yesterday they deserved to lose. No heart, no nothing. Makes me wonder if the Jets players really got off the bus. Maybe they were resting a little too much on their laurels and this game will serve to open up their eyes, that they are still a work in progress and can't take any game for granted.
its the epitome of why the rule was put into place, if the receiver gives their body up to make a catch and is then knocked out of bounds, the benefit of the call goes to the receiver. Its like the tie goes to the runner in baseball. This call was actually and easy one to make, the law of verticality has him placed on the field, he then absorbs the contact which forces him out of bounds. The ref claimed he would have gone out of bounds with his momentum, I am just not sure how he could make that judgement, the ball was thrown to the back of the EZ and he was moving towards the back of the EZ. The rule was put in place to allow Baker to make that catch, talk about your backfires, just ridiculous. Anyways, i predicted a 7-9 season, looks to be headed that way, at least were improving, hope they learned a lesson yesterday, especially the coordinators.
Solomon Wilcots is a moron. You know those commercials -- where they change the outcomes of important plays--like the CATCH is incomplete. Id like to see them air brush those defenders out -- there is no way he wasnt catching that ball in bounds.
The other two cute little hometwon calls were the phantom PI on Miller, and then the no call on the next Jets possesion, on Coles crossing toward the sideline. You can say what you will about the way the team played yesterday, but those two calls were also a net -7. (+4 to Cleveland, -3 coles was in FG range...)
I was thinking the same thing when we lost the call... I'm just glad it wasn't a season ending call...we're bound to be better than last year.
For the first time in my life, I am wondering about the integrity of the NFL. The refereeing in that game was as one sided as I've ever seen. One call after another... 4 face mask penalties that weren't called, 4 PI's that weren't called, the muffed punt, then this. Disgusting.
Good point. I have alot of football friends and they always, always ask, why we don't have our own "house"? Just another cross to bear being a lowly Jets fan. But I love 'em anyway. :jets:
Thanks for posting the video, since I can actually slow things way down on my computer. Look very closely after he makes the catch, before the hit... You can see from the shadow that his right foot is half a yard in bounds, and about 2 inches above the turf. Keep in mind he's facing away from us, so his left foot is almost a yard further in bounds right before the hit. I don't get paid for this crap, but it would have been the easiest and least controversial overturns in NFL history.
Actually, it would have been the most controversial overturn in sports history, since by rule it can't be overturned. BUt I agree with ya. BS call.
