Post Game Thread Pats @ Jets

[Ring 6]

Yeah I get it now. I wasn't thinking about the process of reestablishing control.

Me too until a poster showed the actual rule to us.

 

[Mack Herron]

Well NY radio isn't thrilled with the call (to say the least). Had to turn it off cause it was just getting me pissed.

Sucks, but it's done. Jets made other big mistakes as well that cost the game too. Wasn't just that one play.

This game did prove to me Bowles has this team playing really damn well, or at least much better than expected.

Should be a fun season and especially a fun future meeting in NE.

Enjoy the W NE. Cheers to a good game!

Jets are a good team. If they stay healthy, they will continue to play above expectations. I look forward to the rematch.

 

[Ring 6]

If that is the rule - a rule change is coming.

They say that this rule has been revisited many times and they aren't changing it.

 

[luuked]

As I posted previously, you are looking at it wrong.
Once the ball is out, the standard of gaining possession is the same as a pass reception.

He is airborne when its knocked out. Regardless of the instant he gains possession he must gain it to the standard of a pass reception. No way he gets 2 feet down. Therefore he has to be out of bounds (and beyond the goal line) when he is awarded possession.
If you apply the correct rule what looks like splitting a hair of the instant he controls the ball whole airborne actually becomes a very easy call because there is no way he meets the standard of a catch.

I got it after I read your first explanation. I was definitely looking at it wrong. Thanks for the explanation.

 

[Kdo5]

I just dont get why everything is always a negative. McCown throws the best pass of his game against Jonathan Jones who is very tight in coverage => our defense sucks. He reverts back to what he usually is and Butler intercepts him => McCown sucks.

I said in the GDT that it was a great play by the Jets on JJones when people were *****ing about it and calling the defense terrible over it.

But on the whole, yes, the defense looked mediocre.

 

[bormio]

I don't think it matters if he regained control before touching the ground because in order to reestablish control he would have to touch the ground. It would go back to the "make a football move" stuff. He landed out of bounds before making a football move.

The rule makes no sense - does it apply to anyone recovering a fumble - because that was what the play was.

 

[bormio]

They say that this rule has been revisited many times and they aren't changing it.

Yeah, but now the Pats benefitted from it - all bets are off.

 

[A Defiant Goose]

Me too until a poster showed the actual rule to us.

Devil's advocate but he landed in bounds with one knee (which of course translates to two feet) after fumbling. So whether he recovered it in time while his knee was in bounds is irrelevant because we can't see if he has possession at that point and the original ruling was TD. I'm starting to change my mind on this one based on that key part of the play

 

[PF_SU]

I don't think it matters if he regained control before touching the ground because in order to reestablish control he would have to touch the ground. It would go back to the "make a football move" stuff. He landed out of bounds before making a football move.

He doesn't need to make a football move since it's in the endzone. Just come down with it in-bounds and then complete the process of the catch. But I don't think he ever came down in-bounds.

 

[Mack Herron]

I see what you are saying BUT if you read the rule write up that was posted in this thread, as soon as the ball is loose he has to GAIN possession by the same standard of a catch, i.e. get control then 2 feet in.
Understanding that is the standard it's pretty clear to see he didn't gain possession before being out of bounds.
With that standard it's not as close as it looks. Imo.

I don't think it is clear at all. And many agree.
The refs stole a crucial touchdown from the Jets with a baffling fumble ruling
ASJ fumble touchback

 

[Ring 6]

Am I missing something or is his knee not in bounds when he questionably landed on the ground after fumbling? I'm trying to watch this objectively and if his knee is in bounds while he's landing then I'll change my mind and say that should have stayed with the ruling on the field. If it's out of bounds It's clearly a touchback and Pats ball

It is not clear that he did not do that before landing OOB - at least on view I saw.

Knee not only looks out of bounds but does not land until elbow/upper body land Oob. Hard to tell but part of lower body seems to hit first and is oob. He is twisting as he lands.

 

[nowayback]

holding? This on third down run McGowan 0-0

 

[A Defiant Goose]

(click for zoom) His knee landed in bounds. Bad call. I change my mind. My entire premise was based on him landing out of bounds. Seeing his left knee in bounds changes that. Should've stood as called. But **** the Jets and I'm glad they got screwed out of it anyway

 

[JMC00]

The defense lucked out with the touchback even if it was the right call

Wasn't really luck because Butler came in trying to get he ball loose and he did.

McGowan shredded them but his Butler INT turned the game from the Jets shockingly blowing our doors open to advantage Patriots.

Butler's INT did not change the game. Here were their drives

TD
3 & Out
TD
3 & Out
3 & Out
3 & Out
Butler INT
End of Half (they came out after the Pats TD and kneeled)
McCourty INT

PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW BUTLER'S INT WAS WHAT TURNED IT AROUND?

McCown didn't shred ****. Guy had 265 yards before the offense decided to hold on an 18 yard Dion Lewis run and go 3 and out which put the defense immediately back on the field. How about the offense help the D out in that spot?

The lack of pressure w/o blitzing is handicapping us BAD. QBs have an outrageous amount of time

Not sure what you were watching but McCown was pressured and hurried when they were rushing 4, there was a reason why the jests offense did JACK **** between their 2nd TD in the 1st quarter and that drive they fumbled for a touchback in the 4th quarter

The corner blitz on 4th and 12 was more than a little questionable. Once I saw the blocker pick up Butler, I knew they were going to convert.

Wasn't questionable at all because that type of blitz worked twice prior in the game

The first time Butler was sent turned into a INT and the 2nd time when Harmon was sent lead to McCown running out of the pocket and then throwing across his body and ended up being a loss of 3.

 

[Ring 6]

I don't think it is clear at all. And many agree.
The refs stole a crucial touchdown from the Jets with a baffling fumble ruling

Yup many who are applying the rule incorrectly disagree.

Again once the ball is out (which is while he is airborne) assume he is making a catch (that is the standard) and there is no way that is called a catch.

He doesn't regain possession until
he also completes the "catch" and comes down in bounds.

 

[A Defiant Goose]

Yup many who are applying the rule incorrectly disagree.

Again once the ball is out (which is while he is airborne) assume he is making a catch (that is the standard) and there is no way that is called a catch.

He doesn't regain possession until
he also completes the "catch" and comes down in bounds.

You can see his knee is in bounds and can't tell whether he has or doesn't have possession at that point, and nothing after it confirms he didn't have possession. Bad overturn imo

 

[Ring 6]

(click for zoom) His knee landed in bounds. Bad call. I change my mind. My entire premise was based on him landing out of bounds. Seeing his left knee in bounds changes that. Should've stood as called. But **** the Jets and I'm glad they got screwed out of it anyway

You cannot tell he is on the ground.
Plus if that's the spot his knee touches it's not a TD.
Your shot is too early.

 

[Mack Herron]

Yup many who are applying the rule incorrectly disagree.

Again once the ball is out (which is while he is airborne) assume he is making a catch (that is the standard) and there is no way that is called a catch.

He doesn't regain possession until
he also completes the "catch" and comes down in bounds.

The replay does not establish when he regains possession or where. I looked at the replay many times. I do not see it.
Here’s why refs overturned the Jets’ touchdown and called it a fumble

 

[Ring 6]

You can see his knee is in bounds and can't tell whether he has or doesn't have possession at that point, and nothing after it confirms he didn't have possession. Bad overturn imo

No you cannot see his knee hit the ground.

 

[Husse]

It looks like he comes down in bounds with his knee. It's also clear he fumbled it.


The real question is when he re-established possession. I agree with other posters that the video is inconclusive (from the angles we were shown), it should have stayed a TD.