Ball never touched the ground

[signbabybrady]

So we have this clear as day picture of Henry's hand under the ball. I'm still waiting on one still shot that even looks a little like the ball hit the ground. The fact there isn't one says all you need to know about satisfying the clear and obvious standard for overturning a call on the field.

 

[crawhammer]

So we have this clear as day picture of Henry's hand under the ball. I'm still waiting on one still shot that even looks a little like the ball hit the ground. The fact there isn't one says all you need to know about satisfying the clear and obvious standard for overturning a call on the field.

 

[crawhammer]

You can already see Henry losing his grip of the ball with his left hand in the above photo. With the ball apparently touching the ground.

 

[signbabybrady]

View attachment 47770

Credit to you for at least complying with the exercise.

My argument here is that combined with the other shot I think the ball is just squished over his fingers and he still firmly has control while it touches the ground and that is allowed. We know surviving the ground doesn't exist anymore so control while it touches is the key. So again credit to you thats the look you need if your going to take your stance but I think it's still not enough to have overturned the call on the field.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

View attachment 47770

Touchdown, he's down and the ball is over the goal line.

 

[Triumph]

Touchdown, he's down and the ball is over the goal line.

He was a receiver and not a runner.

Therefore Henry needed to complete the catch. AFTER the ball hit the ground. The ball cannot move to be considered a catch. If Henry tucked the ball away AFTER breaking the goal line plane then its a TD. But, Im 99% positive that Henry did not see the Referee signal TD so he kept trying to score.

 

[Patsfan177a]

You can already see Henry losing his grip of the ball with his left hand in the above photo. With the ball apparently touching the ground.

Mike Tirico called it correctly on the broadcast. Go watch a replay of his commentary if you care to. He said that HH had control of the ball and it was knocked loose by the defender (I think his helmet) as he was lifting the ball off the ground. That's what I see happened. That makes it a TD. It was a TD when HH made the move to try and place the ball over the goal line and broke the plane of the goal as he was falling and rotating. Even if the ball touched the ground AND moved, it is still a TD according to the new rule implemented in 2018, although maybe not by the old rule. When Tony Dungy said that when HH MADE THE MOVE to try and place the ball over the goal, he proved that HH had made a "football move" after catching the ball, which satisfies rule requirements for a TD. Anyone even mentioning "securing the ground" is not using the current rule requirements in their argument.

 

[Triumph]

You can already see Henry losing his grip of the ball with his left hand in the above photo. With the ball apparently touching the ground.

Where people get confused is that not all NFL crews call this play the exact same way.

NFL officiating is a mess. Some crews sole focus on OL holding and others are self appointed experts at PI. For a fact NFL teams know in advance who the next officiating crew is and what aspect of the game do they love to throw flags. Its like trying to avoid going before the hanging judge.

 

[Rob0729]

The ball did touch the ground:



But I question whether the ball actually bobbled. Yes, the ball does move, but I don't see him actually losing possession of the ball. It spins, but Henry never actually loses control of the ball.

 

[Triumph]

Minnesota Screwjob™

The Pats screwed themselves.

If it comes down to call on the field then you did not do enough to win.

 

[crawhammer]

Mike Tirico called it correctly on the broadcast. Go watch a replay of his commentary if you care to. He said that HH had control of the ball and it was knocked loose by the defender (I think his helmet) as he was lifting the ball off the ground. That's what I see happened. That makes it a TD. It was a TD when HH made the move to try and place the ball over the goal line and broke the plane of the goal as he was falling and rotating. Even if the ball touched the ground AND moved, it is still a TD according to the new rule implemented in 2018, although maybe not by the old rule. When Tony Dungy said that when HH MADE THE MOVE to try and place the ball over the goal, he proved that HH had made a "football move" after catching the ball, which satisfies rule requirements for a TD. Anyone even mentioning "securing the ground" is not using the current rule requirements in their argument.

NBC Sports rules analyst and former NFL referee Terry McAulay unequivocally said it was an incompletion on the live broadcast.

 

[The Brandon Five]

The Pats screwed themselves.

If it comes down to calls on the field then you did not do enough to win.

FIFY

 

[Patsfan177a]

NBC Sports rules analyst and former NFL referee Terry McAulay unequivocally said it was an incompletion on the live broadcast.

He also used the description secure the ground, which I think shows he is using old rules to analyze present plays. He is also probably covering for his buddies, and hoping for a better gig. He is also wrong.

 

[The Brandon Five]

NBC Sports rules analyst and former NFL referee Terry McAulay unequivocally said it was an incompletion on the live broadcast.

And he was wrong. The rule was changed as has been pointed out ad nauseum in the thread.

 

[crawhammer]

McAulay's main point was the ball hit the ground, which is being disputed by those who think it was a catch.

 

[Patsfan177a]

McAulay's main point was the ball hit the ground, which is being disputed by those who think it was a catch.

But the ball can touch the ground and it is still a catch.

 

[PatsFan2]

The ball did touch the ground:

View attachment 47784

But I question whether the ball actually bobbled. Yes, the ball does move, but I don't see him actually losing possession of the ball. It spins, but Henry never actually loses control of the ball.

The NFL didn't want the lovable Viking to lose Two games in row @ Home that was a horrible call cost us the game.

 

[Triumph]

And he was wrong. The rule was changed as has been pointed out ad nauseum in the thread.

I have seen that same scenario called this season exactly like Henrys play.

 

[upstater1]

The ball did touch the ground:

View attachment 47784

But I question whether the ball actually bobbled. Yes, the ball does move, but I don't see him actually losing possession of the ball. It spins, but Henry never actually loses control of the ball.

But again, nowhere in the actual rule is any of this relevant. If he regains control of the ball, it doesn't matter if it touched the ground while he was still in possession. It's a catch because he regains control

 

[crawhammer]

But the ball can touch the ground and it is still a catch.

Henry's left hand comes completely off the ball. With that you have to conclude he maintained possession of the ball throughout with his right hand. I don't see that. The ball is moving. If the ball touched the ground, which was McAulay's argument, then it wasn't a catch because Henry didn't maintain possession of the ball. This is also what the NFL is officially stating in defense of the call.