The Rule Regarding James's Erstwhile Catch

[IllegalContact]

that **** ain't the truth. The truth is…the Steelers are the weak, and the Pats the tyranny of evil men. But they're trying, Steelers. They're trying real hard to be the shepherd.

 

[PatriotsNumero1Fan]

The butthurt's strong today. The fact that the patriots benefitted from this call makes it even worse for the patriots haters lol. Gotta love it.

 

[PatriotsNumero1Fan]

What is max Keller mans problem? Almost all known pats haters agree that is no catch even Shannon sharpe says there is no discussion

Dude don't know sh*t! Always been a pats hater. He should have been fired years ago. I can only imagine what that idiot rob parker's thinking today. I have never seen a more luckier team in my life lol.

 

[rochrist]

I do think a minor change to the definition of a football move wouldn't be too bad. Like, in all honesty, reaching for the goal line or first down marker should be considered a football move. If that results in more fumbles, so be it; the players attempt it at their own risk

Football move doesn't enter into this at all. The point is he has to make the catch. To make a catch when you leave your feet to catch the ball, you have to survive contact with the ground. It's a simple rule, and IMO, not a bad one.

 

[rochrist]

Stupid question for you guys regarding his knee being down on this. Wondering if someone can clarify.

I've always thought even of you're not touched the knee being down is a dead ball. Why wasn't he considered down at around the one once his knee was down even before he broke the plane? I'm guessing I'm just thick and you do need to be touched? I'm guessing there is a separate rule for when say a QB takes a knee at the end of a game or a returner takes a knee in the endzone?

Because that isn't the rule for catching the ball. It's simple. If you leave your feet to make a catch, the ball has to survive contact with the ground for the catch to be complete. A knee down or your butt down doesn't matter if the ball comes out when you hit the ground.

 

[Off The Grid]

ray lewis killed a man, why is nobody talking about this in the poll?

That should be a requirement for all poles. I wondered the same thing

I won't insult your intelligence by pretending that there is an excuse. There is none.

This will be...remedied.

 

[Soliel]

I won't insult your intelligence by pretending that there is an excuse. There is none.

This will be...remedied.

That’s awesome bro. I always look forward to voting

 

[A Defiant Goose]

Football move doesn't enter into this at all. The point is he has to make the catch. To make a catch when you leave your feet to catch the ball, you have to survive contact with the ground. It's a simple rule, and IMO, not a bad one.

No, it absolutely enters this because if the act of lunging is considered a football move then the play is over when he breaks the plane because he'd then be considered a runner

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Lance moore had a 2 point conversion in SB 44 that was ruled a catch even though he lost control over the ball. The difference I think is he regained possession right afterwards and the colts guy kicked it out of his hand.

 

[A Defiant Goose]

I just think there are times like in this one and the Dez catch where common sense dictates the guy had the ball and only "lost control of it" while making a lunge for the endzone. Like I get the rule and it was the right call but sometimes you gotta add a little common sense

 

[therealmattheew]

Everyone needs to talk about about that incomplete catch Juju got open on a pick play that should have been called. None of that would have happened.

 

[mosslost]

The rule was applied correctly. The rule did not cause the next two plays to occur as they unfolded. However, I think that was a football catch.

Though the rule was applied correctly.... Like Dez, he CAUGHT the ball, then REACHED for the touchdown. The ironic part about replay is the slow motion you use in a replay makes that more clear. I honestly think if the ball is caught, clearly like that, then the receiver reaches to score, in the end zone or even a first down, surviving the ground should not be any different than it is for a runner.

I'm more worried how we could almost cough up another awesome Brady comeback by letting them get down almost the whole field in one freaking play right after.

@rochrist wrong again

 

[Simpelton]

Lance moore had a 2 point conversion in SB 44 that was ruled a catch even though he lost control over the ball. The difference I think is he regained possession right afterwards and the colts guy kicked it out of his hand.

I see a difference here. The ball was in his hands the entire time until he hit the ground. It never actually hits the dirt until after it's interfered with by another player. The catch is actually completed to the ground, then subsequently dislodged after possession is confirmed and the runner is down

Also, the defender's right knee hit Moore's wrist before it made contact with the ball. Once that knee contacted Moore, Moore was "down by contact" regardless of what subsequently happened to the ball. He's in possession, down by contact and the ball is across the plane.

Nothing that happens subsequently, including the ball being dislodged by the contact, actually matters because he's already down by contact across the plane. 2 point conversion is good.

Now if the defender had made contact with the ball first that might have been another story. But I can definitely see why Moore's 2 point conversion was ruled good.

 

[Angelpats]

Football move doesn't enter into this at all. The point is he has to make the catch. To make a catch when you leave your feet to catch the ball, you have to survive contact with the ground. It's a simple rule, and IMO, not a bad one.

I think a lot of people confuse a catcher for a runner. Too many receivers have caught the ball, taken a step or two and have the ball dropped or knocked out and it being called an incomplete. It’s been happening for years now and I agree with it. Otherwise, there would be tons of fumbles. Tds should be hard to come by, teams should earn it. Catch the ball, survive contact and a td is yours. It’s a good rule.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Dude don't know sh*t! Always been a pats hater. He should have been fired years ago. I can only imagine what that idiot rob parker's thinking today. I have never seen a more luckier team in my life lol.

Last week he was screaming father time caught up to Brady and he was done, the end comes swiftly when you're 40 years old. This call saves him from having to admit he's a moron.

 

[rochrist]

@rochrist wrong again

Why are you quoting yourself and then saying I'm wrong?

 

[rochrist]

No, it absolutely enters this because if the act of lunging is considered a football move then the play is over when he breaks the plane because he'd then be considered a runner

Football move isn't in the rule anywhere.

 

[Boogs]

I think a lot of people confuse a catcher for a runner.

Here is how I think the NFL rule should be. And it would be consistent with their other rules on a completion.

We've often heard, once you caught the ball with control, took two steps or had 2 feet down, at that instance you have made the completion and now are considered a runner. What you do after that moment, you should be considered a runner.

Dez Bryant caught it, took 3 steps, goes down with contact at the 1 foot line. The moment his elbow touches the ground, he has had control, already taken 3 steps and the ground should not cause the fumble because he is now a runner. Ball control was made the whole way until his right elbow was down. Play over period.

This would be consistent with the other NFL rules if the NFL did it this way. I think the rule is inconsistent with the other rules of 2 feet in bounds, and ball across the goal line with control is an instant touchdown the moment control of the ball is demonstrated and crosses the plane.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Here is how I think the NFL rule should be. And it would be consistent with their other rules on a completion.

We've often heard, once you caught the ball with control, took two steps or had 2 feet down, at that instance you have made the completion and now are considered a runner. What you do after that moment, you should be considered a runner.

Dez Bryant caught it, took 3 steps, goes down with contact at the 1 foot line. The moment his elbow touches the ground, he has had control, already taken 3 steps and the ground should not cause the fumble because he is now a runner. Ball control was made the whole way until his right elbow was down. Play over period.

This would be consistent with the other NFL rules if the NFL did it this way. I think the rule is inconsistent with the other rules of 2 feet in bounds, and ball across the goal line with control is an instant touchdown the moment control of the ball is demonstrated and crosses the plane.

I think the issue is that he did not actually have full control when he took those "steps".

 

[Boogs]

I think the issue is that he did not actually have full control when he took those "steps".

I didn't know that was how they argued it for not being a catch.
But IMO, I thought he did have control.

I thought they argued that it came loose after he hit the ground.