Did Jesse James Catch the Ball? (Video)

[supafly]

So, what did you guys think of the video?

I'd like to make more of these (specifically football related) Let's Talks, and feedback would be much appreciated, and would help me decide to continue or not quit my day job

I thought the video was fine. It included a screenshot of the official rule, and several slow-mo looks at the ball moving. It also addresses the difference between being a RB and WR in this situation.

It may not win at the Oscars this year, but it was just as good as many of the other vids that people make. Nice job.

 

[Triumph]

The rules for a run vs a catch are different at the goal line.

If James had caught the ball at the 2 yard line and took a couple of steps becoming a rusher then breaking the plane ends the plays . Touchdown.

This is the same bunch of whining as the tuck rule game.Pure stupidity lost the game for the Steelers. You throw the ball to where only your guy can get it or its incomplete. Kick the FG for a whole new game. Pitt was shredding the NE defense on 3rd down.

Pittsburgh really screwed up. Now that whole Steeler game plan is on film and Belichick will be waiting for those plays should they meet again and have answers to defend them.

 

[Triumph]

"Textbook" catches don't hit the ground.

Textbook catches can hit the ground if you dont lose the ball.

 

[Deus Irae]

Textbook catches can hit the ground if you dont lose the ball.

No, they can't.

 

[jah]

Textbook catches can hit the ground if you dont lose the ball.

I don't think the textbook tells you to stick the ball out over the goal line.

 

[Triumph]

I don't think the textbook tells you to stick the ball out over the goal line.

Thats irrelevant.

A textbook catch can hit the ground but you have to have the ball secured.

 

[Triumph]

No, they can't.

Textbook Foolishness

Right from the rules on what is a catch and what is not.

Item 4. Ball Touches Ground. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control of it, it is a catch, provided that the player continues to maintain control.

Completing a Catch | NFL Football Operations

 

[Tunescribe]

I understand what you guys are saying.

I made the video for those that are on the “Pats always get the calls/Refs cheated for the Pats/Jesse caught the ball/I just hate the Patriots” folks

I use video evidence to support my position. It’s quite clear for those that aren’t biased against NE to see that it wasn’t a catch but sometimes people need a voice telling them (along with evidence of course)

It's amazing how Steelers fans seem completely unwilling to consider the validity of the rule as applied to this play. If this happened to the Patriots my response would be: I don't like it but I accept it. They aren't accepting the reality of it. Like I said in another post, the rule as applied to this play is straightforward and not a matter of opinion/perception -- the video evidence is CLEAR.

A Pittsburgh sports columnist went so far as to hint at conspiracy in the league officiating office, linking this with favorable Pats rulings on the Cooks catch vs. Houston and the ASJ end zone fumble vs. New Jersey. It's scary how people let reason and objectivity fly out the window when what they WANT to happen doesn't happen.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I will just say what I have been saying.
Every receiver knows the rules - secure the ball is the most important part of the process.
He didn't have to reach over the goal line - he should have secured the ball irregardless of field position.

It's on James - not the refs - not the rules - 'Do Your Job' totally explains it.

 

[PatriotsFan87]

Great vid. It makes sense and a great description of the rules. I tried to rule you thumbs up. Thanks for sharing video with us. And more importantly thanks for cheering for the good guys, the best football team of all time.

 

[Deus Irae]

Thats irrelevant.

A textbook catch can hit the ground but you have to have the ball secured.

A "textbook" catch never touches the ground. The reason is simple:

The ball contacting the ground has always been the object of issue with regards to whether or not something is a catch.

No matter how often you post ridiculous nonsense about it being just dandy for the ball to hit the ground, you'll always be talking out of your ass, because that's a variable, not a permanent.

One example:

As referee Bill Carollo told reporters after the game, he saw all he needed to: "It was apparent that the player, as he was catching the ball, he used the ground, and the tip of the ball hit the ground. By rule, you cannot use the ground or have assistance from the ground to make a catch."

from another article citing the above

The tip of the ball touched the ground while Emanuel hauled in his diving grab, and although he maintained complete control of the ball for the entire sequence, the rules at the time expressed that any ball that touched the ground at any point during a player’s catch attempt should be deemed incomplete.

The NFL’s Catch Rule Is Just As Confounding As Ever

Just in recent times: the rule was changed in 2000, 2007, 2011, and 2014 prior to the current version, with the 2000 version coming about at least in part because of that Emanuel play.

and in the offseason the following note was added to the rule book: “It is a catch if in the process of attempting to catch the ball, a player secures control of the ball prior to the ball touching the ground and that control is maintained after the ball has touched the ground.”

So, sorry, but the reality is that, if you want to see a "textbook" catch, you won't see the ball hitting the ground during the process. Think about Gronk going down to catch that Brady pass this past weekend. That's textbook.

Ball + ground = fluid

 

[Deus Irae]

Textbook Foolishness

Right from the rules on what is a catch and what is not.

Item 4. Ball Touches Ground. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control of it, it is a catch, provided that the player continues to maintain control.

Completing a Catch | NFL Football Operations

You can't possibly be this ridiculous, so I'll assume that you're just trolling at this point.

 

[Th3Birdman]

Great vid. It makes sense and a great description of the rules. I tried to rule you thumbs up. Thanks for sharing video with us. And more importantly thanks for cheering for the good guys, the best football team of all time.

I thought the video was fine. It included a screenshot of the official rule, and several slow-mo looks at the ball moving. It also addresses the difference between being a RB and WR in this situation.

It may not win at the Oscars this year, but it was just as good as many of the other vids that people make. Nice job.

Thank you guys, I appreciate your kind words and you taking the time to watch my video. It's asking a lot when you want three minutes of someone's time these days, trust me.

I just tire of seeing people trying to find some sort of conspiracy regarding the Pats but look the other way with their finger in their noses when something happens to us.

Mike Pereira said it best: going to the ground trumps everything else, including "football moves" (which has been taken out of the rulebook), breaking the plane, his knee being down, etc. The truth is, if he kept pulling the ball into his chest like he originally was doing, that's a TD. But he took as risk trying to put the ball in the endzone and it cost him. It is Black and White.

As an aside, if you guys really enjoyed the video, PLEASE SHARE it with others who are not convinced or if you need some form of back up when debating. It isn't perfect but it gets the point across in plain English so that anyone can understand what's going on with the play.

 

[XLIX]

A "textbook" catch never touches the ground.

I am not sure what you mean by "textbook catch" because that is not a football term, but Triumph is correct that the ball can indeed touch the ground and still be considered a completion. The receiver has to clearly possess the ball prior to it hitting the ground AND maintain complete control and possession all the way through the ball touching the ground.

James' problem is the ball moves when it hits the ground, meaning he clearly does not possess it all the way though. If he maintained possession while it touched the ground and it didn't move in his hands, then right now we're the 3 seed.

 

[PatriotsFan87]

Thank you guys, I appreciate your kind words and you taking the time to watch my video. It's asking a lot when you want three minutes of someone's time these days, trust me.

I just tire of seeing people trying to find some sort of conspiracy regarding the Pats but look the other way with their finger in their noses when something happens to us.

Mike Pereira said it best: going to the ground trumps everything else, including "football moves" (which has been taken out of the rulebook), breaking the plane, his knee being down, etc. The truth is, if he kept pulling the ball into his chest like he originally was doing, that's a TD. But he took as risk trying to put the ball in the endzone and it cost him. It is Black and White.

As an aside, if you guys really enjoyed the video, PLEASE SHARE it with others who are not convinced or if you need some form of back up when debating. It isn't perfect but it gets the point across in plain English so that anyone can understand what's going on with the play.

 

[PatriotsFan87]

Of course you are welcome. Like it when people put in the time and come up with educated reasoning. People should overwelmingly like this in my opinion.

 

[Triumph]

A "textbook" catch never touches the ground. The reason is simple:

The ball contacting the ground has always been the object of issue with regards to whether or not something is a catch.

No matter how often you post ridiculous nonsense about it being just dandy for the ball to hit the ground, you'll always be talking out of your ass, because that's a variable, not a permanent.

One example:



from another article citing the above



The NFL’s Catch Rule Is Just As Confounding As Ever

Just in recent times: the rule was changed in 2000, 2007, 2011, and 2014 prior to the current version, with the 2000 version coming about at least in part because of that Emanuel play.



So, sorry, but the reality is that, if you want to see a "textbook" catch, you won't see the ball hitting the ground during the process. Think about Gronk going down to catch that Brady pass this past weekend. That's textbook.

Ball + ground = fluid

The examples you cite the player USED THE GROUND to catch the ball. AGAIN you must have POSSESSION of the ball PRIOR to the BALL touching the ground.

The only person confused about this is you.

I have seen plenty of text book catches where the ball touches the ground with the player in 100% control of the ball. That is a catch regardless if the peanut gallery likes it or not.

 

[Triumph]

I am not sure what you mean by "textbook catch" because that is not a football term, but Triumph is correct that the ball can indeed touch the ground and still be considered a completion. The receiver has to clearly possess the ball prior to it hitting the ground AND maintain complete control and possession all the way through the ball touching the ground.

James' problem is the ball moves when it hits the ground, meaning he clearly does not possess it all the way though. If he maintained possession while it touched the ground and it didn't move in his hands, then right now we're the 3 seed.

He is all caught up in this text book catch nonsense.

That low catch that Gronk hauled in was not Dues textbook. The throw should have been on the numbers. I hope Brady gets straightened out some day.

 

[Deus Irae]

The examples you cite the player USED THE GROUND to catch the ball. AGAIN you must have POSSESSION of the ball PRIOR to the BALL touching the ground.

The only person confused about this is you.

I have seen plenty of text book catches where the ball touches the ground with the player in 100% control of the ball. That is a catch regardless if the peanut gallery likes it or not.

A "textbook" catch doesn't involve the ground. A rulebook catch may involve the ground, just as it may involve surviving the ground, a football move, one foot inbounds, two feet inbounds, etc...

A "textbook" catch, for every human being alive today, involves the receiver getting one or two hands on the ball and fielding it cleanly without it ever hitting the ground. That's why those of us inclined to play the game always practiced making catches that were just that way.

The same is true in baseball, by the way.

This really isn't difficult stuff.

 

[Angelpats]

Textbook Foolishness

Right from the rules on what is a catch and what is not.

Item 4. Ball Touches Ground. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control of it, it is a catch, provided that the player continues to maintain control.

Completing a Catch | NFL Football Operations

If we are talking about the catch in question it certainly did not fulfill item 4.