Ball never touched the ground

[Triumph]

It's allowed to

And, for it to be a completed reception the receiver must have 100% control of the ball through 100% of the play.

The fact that the ball already crossed the goaline is irrelevant, Henry was not a runner.

 

[Triumph]

Take a screen shot and show us

The video is out there.

Its over. NE lost.

 

[neuronet]

It touched the ground.

All the still photos of after it touched the ground wont change that.

It should be easy to show evidence. But more relevant, it isn't clear it matters since they changed the rule in 2018 about "surviving the ground" so that is the more relevant discussion is "what is a catch". He pushed the ball over the goal line, making it a TD. Look up the 2018 rule change.

 

[Triumph]

It should be easy to show evidence. But more relevant, it isn't clear it matters since they changed the rule in 2018 about "surviving the ground" so that is the more relevant discussion is "what is a catch". He pushed the ball over the goal line, making it a TD. Look up the 2018 rule change.

Henry was not a RB.

Henry was a receiver.

 

[neuronet]

Henry was not a RB.

Henry was a receiver.

You keep saying this, but they changed the rule for receptions and TDs partly because of the Patriots game vs Pittsburgh because Jesse James dropped the ball when it hit the ground after reaching over the goal line during the reception as a WR.

It was exactly plays like this the new 2018 rule was meant to not allow to happen again (note that was called an incomplete pass at the time):

 

[40yrpatsfan]

The entire video of Henry going to the ground shows the tip of the ball hitting the turf.

Thats the truth. I dont like it anymore than you men.

You can't really tell for 100% sure if the ball ever touched the ground. It's very close and may have, but it's very possible it didn't, and the overturn required conclusive proof. So there's that in our favor, it should not have been overturned on that basis alone.

Even if it did touch the ground, and even if the pre-2018 rule still existed (which it doesn't), Henry had firm control of it with both hands at the moment it grazed the ground. The ball then moved slightly a second later when it was up and away from the ground, on top of his chest, and it never touched the ground again. So it did "survive the ground".

If you squeeze a football tightly with both hands and touch the ground with an exposed part of the ball, then move it up and it flips in your hand but you continue to hold it, that's the situation here.

 

[captain stone]

It touched the ground.

All the still photos of after it touched the ground wont change that.

How long have we all been watching the NFL? You need to survive the ground for it to be a catch. The ball was moving around. It’s a crappy rule but that’s just what it is nowadays.

Yes the ball touched the ground... But listen carefully now, you two:
HENRY HAD CONTROL OF THE BALL WHEN IT DID!

The ball did NOT move until he HIMSELF had raised it... When he secured the ball on his chest, the catch process was COMPLETE!

Bill should've been given a choice: 4th/Goal from inside the 1; or First/Goal from the 5.

 

[captain stone]

You keep saying this, but they changed the rule for receptions and TDs partly because of the Patriots game vs Pittsburgh because Jesse James dropped the ball when it hit the ground after reaching over the goal line during the reception as a WR.

It was exactly plays like this the new 2018 rule was meant to not allow to happen again (note that was called an incomplete pass at the time):

The ruling on the James catch was the CORRECT call... He did NOT complete the catch process.

 

[Jim Beankie]

I was surprised at how quickly the broadcast official called it, and watching it again, I thought they got the call right. Watching the full slowmo and not just cherry picking a screenshot, It hit the ground and loss of control began during or immediately after that. The "football move" reach out started before he established possession (feet/elbow/knee on the ground), so in my head it was still part of the catch process. Homer fan me strongly disagrees with myself, but they did spend an obscene amount of time on it. Sadly, Dungy was right. If HH just brought it into his body and frankly just held onto the ball with no bobble, then it would've been a TD.

I thought they got the Kelce call right as well. I'm gonna go Brad Pitt punch my Ed Norton face right now.

 

[crawhammer]

Did I miss something where suddenly EVERYONE has concluded this was a catch? By everyone I'm including the NFL Officiating Headquarters has apologized for screwing up the call even after a nearly 10 minute in game review. I mean some people here are talking like this is a no-doubter at this point.

I suppose it's not clear cut either way, although to me it looks like an incompletion. Considering the initial call was a completion for a TD, I can understand making the argument that the original call should have stood. Is that fair? Ash?

 

[upstater1]

My big thing though is that Pereira in another game where the same thing happened even said the ball can move as long as you have control. Henry's bottom hand never left the ball even when he rolled onto his back.

The rule also makes me wonder if there's a time limit to all this, I mean what if a catch is made, player goes to ground, stays in control, rolls onto his back, and then the ball is knocked out of his hand.

Is he down? Before it's knocked out?

I think Pereira is right that movement is allowed as long as you have control. He left hand never lost the ball, he remained in possession. Doesn't matter if it moves, if the other hand comes off, etc.

 

[bresna]

Did I miss something where suddenly EVERYONE has concluded this was a catch? By everyone I'm including the NFL Officiating Headquarters has apologized for screwing up the call even after a nearly 10 minute in game review. I mean some people here are talking like this is a no-doubter at this point.

I suppose it's not clear cut either way, although to me it looks like an incompletion. Considering the initial call was a completion for a TD, I can understand making the argument that the original call should have stood. Is that fair? Ash?

As a matter of fact, the NFL head of officiating did comment on it and screwed it up even more by quoting the old rule.

Here's the head of officiating's comments on the play right here:
“Because as he’s going to the ground, he has to maintain control of the ball upon contacting the ground,” Anderson said. “The term that’s commonly used is ‘surviving the ground.’ A lot of people refer to that. So, as he’s going to the ground, he has the elements of two feet and control, but because he’s going to the ground, he has to maintain control of the ball when he does go to the ground.”

And here's the NFL's own webpage talking about the 2018 rule change:
The key change to the rule eliminated the "going-to-the-ground" element of the previous rule."

That's from their own webpage! They eliminated "going to the ground" completely from the catch rules in 2018 and here is the head of officiating using the phrase "ground" 6 times in 4 sentences while describing why they called it incomplete.

This was a screw job, plain & simple.

By the new rules, this was a catch here:


And once his knee hit, which was before the ball came anywhere near the ground, it was complete & a TD.

 

[upstater1]

Here is the rule again:

A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) in the field of play, at the sideline, or in the end zone if a player, who is inbounds:

1. secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
2. touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
3. after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

Before getting into the NOTES part of the rule, it's clear Henry completed Parts A and B. He did not complete Part C because his attempt to extend happened BEFORE his knee came down. So now, because all 3 parts are not complete, we have to go to the subsection notes.

Notes:

• Movement of the ball does not automatically result in loss of control.

OK, good to know, this is what Pereira has said.

• If a player, who satisfied (a) and (b), but has not satisfied (c), contacts the ground and loses control of the ball, it is an incomplete pass if the ball hits the ground before he regains control, or if he regains control out of bounds

This one is really interesting. He contacts the ground and loses control BUT the ball did not hit the ground before he regained control. Therefore it's a completion.

• A receiver is considered a player in a defenseless posture throughout the entire process of the catch and until the player is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent.
• If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.
• If a player, who is in possession of the ball, is held up and carried out of bounds by an opponent before both feet or any part of his body other than his hands touches the ground inbounds, it is a completed or intercepted pass. It is not necessary for the player to maintain control of the ball when he lands out of bounds.

By rule that's a completion.

 

[bresna]

One last thing before this thread fades away... for those of you claiming that the catch was overturned because the ball hit the ground, look again at Walt Anderson, the head of officiating's remarks. He said:

“Because as he’s going to the ground, he has to maintain control of the ball upon contacting the ground,” Anderson said. “The term that’s commonly used is ‘surviving the ground.’ A lot of people refer to that. So, as he’s going to the ground, he has the elements of two feet and control, but because he’s going to the ground, he has to maintain control of the ball when he does go to the ground.”

Does anyone see any reference to the ball touching the ground? That's because he didn't say that. He did say that "he has the elements of two feet and control," which means he caught it. The rest of his statement is basically him saying the slight bobble as he transferred the ball to his chest was the sole reason for ruling that incomplete. So they applied a 2017 rule to a 2022 play.

BTW, because he doesn't say that it hit the ground, in any season, that's a catch with, at worst, possession on the 6 inch yard line. Their ruling of an incomplete pass seems to be applying some sort of going out of bounds rule in the middle of the field. If the ball never touched the ground, he eventually had it in his hands at the 6 inch yard line. Unless they're now saying bobbles at the goal line aren't catches?

 

[Nehalem]

You keep saying this, but they changed the rule for receptions and TDs partly because of the Patriots game vs Pittsburgh because Jesse James dropped the ball when it hit the ground after reaching over the goal line during the reception as a WR.

It was exactly plays like this the new 2018 rule was meant to not allow to happen again (note that was called an incomplete pass at the time):

Honestly that looks like it should be an incomplete pass. Don't care what the rule says.

The Henry one is different as the ball, didn't appear at least, to touch the ground.

 

[neuronet]

The ruling on the James catch was the CORRECT call... He did NOT complete the catch process.

Right. At the time. And they changed the rule in 2018 so it wouldn’t happen again.

 

[goheels22002]

Yes.

They violated their own protocols

The TD pass catch rule is completely counterintuitive. If a runner breaks the plane with the ball it is a TD regardless of what happens afterward. The same should be true for TD catches. If the receiver has control of the ball when the ball breaks the plane, it's instantly a dead ball and nothing else matters. The decisive factor on replay should be whether the receiver had control of the ball, just like on out of bounds calls. In the case of the end zone, the player can regain control while in the end zone before he goes out of bounds for the TD.

Is there a way for a fan petition signed by a zillion of us to put something on the Competition Committee Agenda?

And Dugger was held on the kickoff return for a TD..

 

[goheels22002]

It touched the ground.

All the still photos of after it touched the ground wont change that.

Agreed, but it's a terrible rule. See my post above.

 

[Triumph]

Agreed, but it's a terrible rule. See my post above.

Agree with you on treating a reception that breaks the goaline plane as a TD. No further discussion on the field of play is needed.

Henry did not know that the Ref signaled TD because he was focused on the ball. It was easy for Tony Dingy to say that Henry should have tucked the ball away and went down.

The biggest issue with NFL officiating is that it is erratic. NFL crews do not call the same penalties consistently and uniformly. I have seen PI called because the DB was not looking back for the ball and Ive seen the exact same situation not called and the announcers state that it was great coverage. Some QBs like Justin Fields get cheap shots not called, but getting Mahomes or Brady dirty is a penalty.

You really have to beat the other team and the referees. If it boils down to blaming the officiating for losing then your team did not do enough to win the game.

 

[moosekill]

In my mind, if the ball touched the ground it was an incomplete pass. If the ball didn't touch the ground it was a completion. I couldn't tell from the replays if the ball hit the ground or not. If the ref's ruled that it did hit the ground they made the right call. If it didn't hit the ground they were wrong.