Jabar TD and the Refs

[Wildo7]

People will get caught up in whether or not that catch was a catch. I think most objective people would see that he wasn't juggling and controlled the ball all the way through while moving it to his left side so as not to have a defender knock it out.

What people have overlooked is that if it had been overturned we would have had 1st and goal at the one yard line because of the back to back unsportsmanlike conduct penalties. I would have also liked our chances in that situation.

Also the calls that "went our way ate the end of the game" were all completely indisputable and warranted penalties on a Ravens team that has absolutely nothing to complain about after basically holding and playing without PI enforcement against them for 3 quarters.

 

[nowayback]

i was sort of hoping it would be overturned...so we could run out the rest of the clock. from the 2 i think..i was at 8 and 2 half pen makes 2. although..you never know if you will put it in from the 2

 

[SoCalPatsfan90]

I believe it was a questionable call... however, the two personals would have made it first and goal on the .5 yd line no? So 7 was basically a gimmie anyways...

 

[Hardboiled]

I didn't think it was a catch and thought it was going to be reversed. But I wasn't worried due to the penalties that were going to be tacked on.

What a strange game.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

it looked to me like he didnt have complete control. kinda bobbled in the right hand. however, i agree, with the penalties, we wouldve had 1st and goal on the 1, and wouldve scored.

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

It was a booth review, which is all but mandatory on a catch like that. The ref took a 10 second glance cuz he had to. It wasn't even close to a non-catch, despite what ESPN was so desperatly pushing.

It was a good pass and catch all the way.

 

[patsox23]

Even if it had been overruled, that would've been okay for us. 1st and goal on the one (or two) - with a chance to burn yet MORE time off the clock. Of course, the Ravens D could've stopped us, they were certainly capable of doing that and had done a good job inside the 5 for the game. Still, I think we could've gotten the ball in from there with 4 tries.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

I think it was a close call. I think the fact that he had a part of one hand or the other sticking to the some part of the ball for the entire duration. If, at any time, both hands had the surface of the ball moving under neath them, it would have gone the other way. I thought it was a catch, and that the old "indesputal" part almost sealed. I do concede that if the call went the other way, with the grayness of the rule, it wouldn't have been a bad call.

 

[Johnny Mac]

I didn't think it was a catch, but there wasn't enough evidence to overturn it, plain and simple.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

I believe it was a questionable call... however, the two personals would have made it first and goal on the .5 yd line no? So 7 was basically a gimmie anyways...

The play started at the 8 yd line IIRC, so the two personal fouls would have moved it half the distance to the 4 and then the 2. 1st and goal at the two with 44 seconds left....

 

[kriskanos]

If that wasnt a catch I'll kiss your head coach(billick)

 

[Rob0729]

Personally I didn't think it was that close. Not being a homer here, but it looked like Gaffney was tucking the ball in, but always had control of the ball. He didn't look to be bobbling it at all. He can pass it from hand to hand and be in control of the ball.

I thought the holding in the end zone was questionable though.

 

[chrisfx811]

I didn't think it was a clear catch.
The ball was moving along his finger tips as he was trying to wrap his hands around the ball. He never loses contact with the ball, like a true bobble, but he doesn't have the ball 'secured'. I don't know the exact interpretation of the rule, but that's what it looked like to me, and I wanted the Pats to win.

I kept saying that it didn't matter, as we would have had the 1st & goal everyone mentions, but no one is even talking about that. I'm pretty confident Eckel & Evans could've smashed it in there.

 

[PantsB]

Personally I didn't think it was that close. Not being a homer here, but it looked like Gaffney was tucking the ball in, but always had control of the ball. He didn't look to be bobbling it at all. He can pass it from hand to hand and be in control of the ball.

I agree, tucking the ball is not the same as bobbling. I never thought it was even close. Maybe the broadcast looking for controversy had something to do with it? Wasn't the call not only upheld but confirmed (as in it would have been reversed the other way) by the review?

 

[letekro]

The play started at the 8 yd line IIRC, so the two personal fouls would have moved it half the distance to the 4 and then the 2. 1st and goal at the two with 44 seconds left....

We would've been better off staying at the 8. Unless the prospect of Heath Evans running behind Junior Seau excites you.