Belichick said both calls you refer to from last night's game were called correctly. That's good enough for me.
You make your own luck. The Giants have the key elements in place to make a Super Bowl run and even though a lot of those elements sucked during the season they were there when needed to win that game.
Plus the giants also lucked out by getting to face the weakest team in the nation in the SB because of the luck the Pats had getting into the big game. A missed 30 yrd FG?
I'm tempted to close this thread because it's stupid, doesn't relate to the Jets and makes Jet fans look like losers. That being said I knew and even posted in here that the Giants were going to the the SB after they beat us. People laughed. I wanted to be wrong, I really did but you could see that they were a good once healthy. Sorry but the Giants have an elite QB, a fantastic group of WR's, 2 solid RB's and a great pass rush along with special players on the Dline. We don't have any of that. That's why they won and we were home watching. If the Jets want to win championships they should look across the stadium on how to build a winner. They surronded Eli with incredible WR's and always draft BPA instead of trying to reach to fill needs and how many project players do they draft? Sorry, they're a dam good team, not lucky.
it isn't if the ball moves, it is if the ball separates from his hands to any extent and it did not. it hit his hands and never left. that ball was firmly in his possession and any movement of the ball is just movement of his hands. his hands can move all they want. even the refs said the call was confirmed, not upheld. it was a catch and arguably the best I've seen in the Super Bowl.
Stop your hating, you sound like a fool. 1. Giants won, beat a lot of good teams along the way. 2. ANY Jets fan would take Manning over Sanchez. 3. The Giants front office is better then the Jets. Please let me know if I missed anything.
You should close it we don't want any of this pussy shit up in here. I mean they won the Superbowl. Maybe they had some luck but they also had a bunch of plays that were talented. They won lets not act like a bunch of butt hurt fags over it.
How is Manninghams catch lucky? It was a perfect throw and a great catch. The other ones, yeah....they had their fair share of good bounces.
IMO, Let people whine today. Tomorrow, all Giants related threads should be closed. This includes in the NFL forum. Leave a Super Bowl Discussion thread open and that's all (you can leave the Pats bashing threads open though :wink. These threads have nothing to do with the Jets. The offseason begins today, let's talk about what the Jets need to do to get to this spot a year from now.
if the ball moves at all it is incomplete he doesn't have to lose possession. It's a dumb rule and one time they call it a ctahc and the next time it's not, thuis just happened to be one of the called catches but by the rule it was incomplete.
I don't necessarily think it's all "luck," per se. I think the Giants are a team that, despite having a very mediocre season (including two losses to the hapless Redskins), play very well in the playoffs. They've done it several times over the years. Now, they did certainly have a few breaks go their way, but I think the old addage "you make your own luck" really applies to them. Take, for instance, the two fumbles they recovered. That doesn't happen if Hynoski and Snee weren't trailing the play. That's discipline and good coaching. Even though they weren't really involved anymore, they didn't stop playing. They kept running and got involved. May look like luck, and it is lucky that the ball bounced to them, but they put themselves in that position.
if the ball moves in regards to separating from his grasp. basically, bobbling the ball. not if a player has a firm grasp on the ball and his hands are moving; of course the ball will move wherever his hands go; that doesn't have anything to do with possession. had he caught it, bobbled it even just an inch, and regained full possession, his feet must then again re-establish two feet in bounds after that re-establishing of possession. that didn't occur. the moment it hit his hands it never left his grip, he maintained full possession, and the movement you are claiming wasn't movement of the ball it was movement of his hands.
when he hit the ground the ball clearly shifted. I hate the rule but by the rules it's incomplete, try to remember back to the Chris Chambers play in 2002 and the Coles reversal in 2005 vs. NO. Same exact type of play except I think they had a better camera angle but it's ind boggling to me that in the SB where they have more cameras than any other game they couldn't get a better shot of him hitting the ground.
you're right, if it does shift and that movement is separation from his grasp, even if just a centimeter, then it is incomplete. I don't see that. I see the ball moving simply as a repercussion of the movement of his body but never any loss of complete possession. that makes it a catch.
direct from the NFL rulebook for player possession: Note 1: A player who goes to the ground in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball (with or without contact by an opponent) must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting 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, there is no possession. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, it is a catch, interception, or recovery. Note 3: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.
is that on the sideline our OOB plays? in the field of play you can bobble as long as you maintain possession but unless they have changed the rules inr ecent years(it's possible) on a play like that where he falls OOB he needs to maintain complete possession and the ball cannot move an inch.
