Did Jesse James Catch the Ball? (Video)

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

So, what did you guys think of the video?

It is good, but in this case professional referees have already explained it pretty thoroughly. Anyone unwilling to accept a referee's exanation will not be willing to hear you out, since you are a Pats Fan and not a ref.

 

[Silver Blue&Red]

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.

It's a whole other story when the Pats are involved.

I was watching the "Replay" on NFLN, at 9pm.

The holding that Pitt got away with were mind boggling.
Mind, you they were letting them play, on both sides. But WTF?

But please, Pitt fans, non Pat fans..etc.. just let it go.

TB and BB will be gone soon. Until then, deal with it. Jeez!

 

[Triumph]

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

Do you mean...textbook?

 

[Angelpats]

Do you mean...textbook?

No, just the catch this thread is about. In regards to textbook, if a receiver has a ball in full control with no movement then he could rub that ball on the ground or wherever he wants.

 

[davidg5700]

In my video, I believe I address that (though not exactly in words, just with video evidence and an arrow pointing at it).

Yes, you did address it with the arrow and stating that he "loses control" of the ball. My point is that had been stated from many other sources. What makes something standout to me is analysis that clarifies what losing control looks like. Was it just the fact that the left hand completely comes off the ball? Couldn't the right hand theoretically keep the ball under control? Or was it that the laces are seen rotating before the ball touches the ground that shows the ball is moving in his hand and thus not under control? (What I saw as the true tell )

For me, the value in media that I consume is gaining some knowledge afterwards. Yes, the video was well done, but at the end I was left thinking "ok, it was more pleasant hearing that analysis with a smoother voice and different background music". I come to this board mainly for the wealth of football knowledge that resides here and the occasional homerist indulgence. Analysis I read here greatly increases my understanding of what I see gametime. That is what I am looking for from an analysis video. Getting that kind of information would make me come back again.

 

[denverpatsfan]

It's W Wednesday and the national media is STILL whining about this! When will it end. The Pats franchise went 30+ years without getting a single call like this and nobody cared.

 

[letekro]

Vintage Deus in this thread

 

[Ring 6]

It's W Wednesday and the national media is STILL whining about this! When will it end. The Pats franchise went 30+ years without getting a single call like this and nobody cared.

Actually they probably had just as many calls like this but no one paid attention because they weren’t happening at critical times in important games.
It as funny when the tuck rule happened and everyone said they never heard of it until people went back and found the actual plays including one that went against us earlier that year vs the Jete.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

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)

Unvarnished feedback: professionally done and clear, but it was too long and was accompanied by too much "intro" and subsequent editorializing and ultimately added nothing to the video and explanation released by the League Office.

But, judging from the number of people who seem to want to ignore the facts, there might be an audience; the problem is that I'm not sure how you'd target the audience to reach it.

Thanks for the work and for asking for feedback.

 

[IllegalContact]

he failed to catch the ball

he did, however, pick the ball up off the ground

 

[PatsFanSince74]

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

I did a little research on "textbook" catches.

I just asked my kid to throw me his geometry textbook and discovered that it hits the ground if I drop it. Very, very informative, don't you think?

I also discovered that it's easier to secure the textbook before it hits the ground if I grab it by the bound edge and not the open pages. If I grab it by the open pages, either the front or back cover hits the floor before I can control it and it is definitely not a catch...and you can tear a few pages in the process.

 

[chasa]

not according to teh current nfl rulebook. /thread

 

[Soliel]

My interpretation of the rule is that it was not a catch. The talking heads seem to want it to be a catch because of what was on the line... ergo they mean not applying it all sixty minutes. If it’s a afc playoff deciding game in the last minute then it should be a no call.. lmao

It’s not a hard rule to understand once you decipher the jargon.

 

[Th3Birdman]

Yes, you did address it with the arrow and stating that he "loses control" of the ball. My point is that had been stated from many other sources. What makes something standout to me is analysis that clarifies what losing control looks like. Was it just the fact that the left hand completely comes off the ball? Couldn't the right hand theoretically keep the ball under control? Or was it that the laces are seen rotating before the ball touches the ground that shows the ball is moving in his hand and thus not under control? (What I saw as the true tell )

For me, the value in media that I consume is gaining some knowledge afterwards. Yes, the video was well done, but at the end I was left thinking "ok, it was more pleasant hearing that analysis with a smoother voice and different background music". I come to this board mainly for the wealth of football knowledge that resides here and the occasional homerist indulgence. Analysis I read here greatly increases my understanding of what I see gametime. That is what I am looking for from an analysis video. Getting that kind of information would make me come back again.

This video was meant to help the mouth breathers understand a very simple rule in football. These people are the type that shout “it was a catch, da patz r cheaterzzz” on every video.

Could I have gone in more depth? Absolutely. But there is a poster in this thread literally saying a 3 minute video was too long for him— that’s the kind of attention span I need to cater to and going into that sort of depth is actually counter-intuitive.

 

[K. Dog]

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

Excellent video, thanks.

 

[RedSleevesPinkStripes]

In a parallel dimension, the Patriots beat the Steelers on a bobbled Gronk TD and Steelers fans are still complaining a week later that the ball bobbled/hit ground/was incomplete.

 

[BTTA]

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.

I appreciate you doing this. And you've got a great voice for it.

Either the rule is poorly written, or one aspect of your narration is misleading. It shouldn't matter whether the player is a Running Back or a Wide Receiver; that should be irrelevant. What is relevant is whether the player is running with the ball or catching a pass when they cross the goal line. This rule should apply to any position on the field, other than ineligible receivers in the case of catching a pass.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I appreciate you doing this. And you've got a great voice for it.

Either the rule is poorly written, or one aspect of your narration is misleading. It shouldn't matter whether the player is a Running Back or a Wide Receiver; that should be irrelevant. What is relevant is whether the player is running with the ball or catching a pass when they cross the goal line. This rule should apply to any position on the field, other than ineligible receivers in the case of catching a pass.

The actual rule does not talk about positions. It doesn't even distinguish between offense and defense (nor should it). It only talks about whether a player already has possession or is attempting to catch a pass (or, like in ASJ's case, attempting to recover a loose ball).

 

[Th3Birdman]

I appreciate you doing this. And you've got a great voice for it.

Either the rule is poorly written, or one aspect of your narration is misleading. It shouldn't matter whether the player is a Running Back or a Wide Receiver; that should be irrelevant. What is relevant is whether the player is running with the ball or catching a pass when they cross the goal line. This rule should apply to any position on the field, other than ineligible receivers in the case of catching a pass.

I’m saying that a player that is catching a pass (wide receiver) is treated differently than a player running the ball (typically a running back; runner).

Pass catchers have to survive the ground and are not considered runners until they have demonstrated complete control of the ball. Runners (in this case, an RB) already have established control of the ball, as they are handed off the football, not thrown it. So breaking the plane for them counts as a TD. It doesn’t for pass catchers.

Thanks for your comment though, I appreciate it!

 

[BTTA]

I’m saying that a player that is catching a pass (wide receiver) is treated differently than a player running the ball (typically a running back; runner).

Pass catchers have to survive the ground and are not considered runners until they have demonstrated complete control of the ball. Runners (in this case, an RB) already have established control of the ball, as they are handed off the football, not thrown it. So breaking the plane for them counts as a TD. It doesn’t for pass catchers.

Thanks for your comment though, I appreciate it!

Yeah, I understood your intent. Was commenting on your execution of it...you asked for feedback! To make it better, substitute "pass catcher" for "wide receiver" and "runner" for "running back."

I was actually going to post this on another message board which is full of Squealers fans, until I got to the second half where you apologize for being a Pats' fan...which would have only attracted more hatred my way.

Like I said, you've got a great voice for it, so if you want to do a series of "explaining the call" videos you could probably make something of it. You'd have to camo the Pats fan bit.