Dion Lewis Fumble/NOT a fumble

[QuantumMechanic]

They're disputing it was a fumble. Saying:

1. It was a fumble
2: The rule for establishing possession in a fumble recovery were not met.

Is begging the question. You cant prove 1, by quoting the rule for 2.

I'm not disputing either point, I'm saying that is the argument being made.

That's some of it. There are also a number of people claiming that the "surviving-the-ground" rule only applies in a catching a pass situation. That's what I'm addressing.

 

[Chris Stevenson]

Clear fumble

CLEAR RE-POSSESSION by Lewis against his leg. Tight, firm. No jostle, no space between the ball, his hand or leg.

Left knee down.

Down.

No fumble.

 

[SalemPats]

I was hoping they would call it Patriots ball, but the right call was a fumble

 

[XLIX]

Anyone who has established possession only has to maintain it until downed not all the way through contact with the ground.

The problem is that after the fumble, he never re-established possession.

Sorry, but having the ball loosely pinned to your hip for 0.2 seconds just does not fit any reasonable definition (or textbook rules definition) of “firm grasp and control.”

 

[chasa]

Too bad those don't apply. If you can show me space between Lewis's hand or leg with the ball, you win.

You won't find, it though.

The only proof you need that it was a fumble is this: the refs called it a fumble, they reviewed it, and the call was confirmed as a fumble.

Thus it WAS a fumble.

case closed your honor.

 

[XLIX]

"He. Never. Lost. Possession". That's the point. It was never loose.

You have *got* to be kidding. Did you see the picture I posted where the ball is almost entirely free floating in mid-air, having contact only with the very top of Lewis’ fingers?

You must not have.

 

[Chris Stevenson]

The only proof you need that it was a fumble is this: the refs called it a fumble, they reviewed it, and the call was confirmed as a fumble.

Thus it WAS a fumble.

case closed your honor.

Sounds great. Too bad your wrong based on the backside camera angle replay, which clearly shows Jack did not have the ball stolen from Lewis before his knee hit the ground, and that's because Lewis HAD POSSESSION, visibly up against his leg, with no movement of any kind, for about a half second.

You would be correct if Jack physically stole the ball from Lewis, and we could see that before Lewis hit the ground.

Think Bruschi stealing the ball out of Domenic Rhodes's hands in the 2004 divisonal rd game. We saw Bruschi take the ball and possess it before Rhodes had hit the ground.

If I can see this on a replay, then that is what replay is for.

Get it?

The tv angle used, it made it seem like in fact it WAS a fumble, but what we didn't see in real time was that Lewis, re-possessed the ball.

You're completely discounting Lewis showing us he re-possessed it after jack knocked it loose.

If he had knocked it loose, the ball would have fallen to the ground or Jack would have had it before Lewis hit the ground, hence not a fumble.

You can either learn the rules or side with god awful officials who also don't know the rules.

 

[XLIX]

in my opinion, the ball comes loose here. you don't agree. that's fine.

The ball 100% clearly comes loose. It blows my mind that there can possibly anyone who disagrees with that fact.

 

[Chris Stevenson]

The ball 100% clearly comes loose. It blows my mind that there can possibly anyone who disagrees with that fact.

Keep showing us fraudulent angles and only the front part of the play, to show how disingenuous you want to be.

Are you related to Goodell?

 

[XLIX]

Sounds great. Too bad your wrong based on the backside camera angle replay, which clearly shows Jack did not have the ball stolen from Lewis before his knee hit the ground, and that's because Lewis HAD POSSESSION, visibly up against his leg, with no movement of any kind, for about a half second.

You would be correct if Jack physically stole the ball from Lewis, and we could see that before Lewis hit the ground.

Think Bruschi stealing the ball out of Domenic Rhodes's hands in the 2004 divisonal rd game. We saw Bruschi take the ball and possess it before Rhodes had hit the ground.

If I can see this on a replay, then that is what replay is for.

Get it?

The tv angle used, it made it seem like in fact it WAS a fumble, but what we didn't see in real time was that Lewis, re-possessed the ball.

You're completely discounting Lewis showing us he re-possessed it after jack knocked it loose.

If he had knocked it loose, the ball would have fallen to the ground or Jack would have had it before Lewis hit the ground, hence not a fumble.

You can either learn the rules or side with god awful officials who also don't know the rules.

The one who doesn’t know the rules here is you.

Saying a professional referee made a bad judgement call is one thing. Saying you know the rules *better* than a ref is laughable.

 

[Chris Stevenson]

The one who doesn’t know the rules here is you.

Saying a professional referee made a bad judgement call is one thing. Saying you know the rules *better* than a ref is laughable.

Lewis re-possessed the ball. Clear as day. Firmly against his leg.

Did Tyree finally show possession against his helmet with no space between the ball, his hands and helmet or no?

Like I said, I know the rules. You acted like the ball came loose and stayed loose, which is 100%, factually incorrect based on the replay. Hint: There is a reason we have replay.

Lewis showed the viewer of the replay, he re-possessed the ball on the way to the ground.

Knee down, then Jack ripped it loose. Just because it happens fast or you doesn't know the rules, doesn't mean it's not a fact.

If Jack recovered the fumble, he would have shown to have stolen it from Lewis or the ball would have come loose fully from Lewis. Pretty simple stuff here.

 

[XLIX]

Keep showing us fraudulent angles and only the front part of the play, to show how disingenuous you want to be.

Are you related to Goodell?

There is no angle which does not show Lewis losing his grasp of the ball.

Are you related to Simple Jack?

 

[XLIX]

Lewis re-possessed the ball. Clear as day. Firmly against his leg.

Yeah, it was so “firmly against his leg” that it came out the second he hit the ground.

By your own admission, the ball was against his leg “for about a half second.” (Even that is a generous assessment but I am just quoting your own words)

On what planet does holding the ball against your hip “for about a half second” constitute firm grasp and control?

 

[Chris Stevenson]

The second video of this replay is the best and it clearly shows Lewis with firm control of the ball tied to his hip all the way to the ground.

VIDEO: Myles Jack Should Have Had a Touchdown on Dion Lewis Fumble

I know you so badly want to change truth and fact, but ya can't.

Admit the call was wrong and stop trolling.

 

[XLIX]

There is a clear-as-day rule that I think some in here are not aware of:

If a player is in the process of going to the ground while trying to make a catch, he has to survive the ground or it is incomplete.

If a player is in the process of going to the ground while trying to recover a fumble, he has to survive the ground or it is still a loose ball.

 

[XLIX]

The second video of this replay is the best and it clearly shows Lewis with firm control of the ball tied to his hip all the way to the ground.

VIDEO: Myles Jack Should Have Had a Touchdown on Dion Lewis Fumble

I know you so badly want to change truth and fact, but ya can't.

Admit the call was wrong and stop trolling.

The only troll here is you, Simple Jack

 

[Chris Stevenson]

Yeah, it was so “firmly against his leg” that it came out the second he hit the ground.

By your own admission, the ball was against his leg “for about a half second.” (Even that is a generous assessment but I am just quoting your own words)

On what planet does holding the ball against your hip “for about a half second” constitute firm grasp and control?

Umm, that we all saw it? How is that? This is exactly what replay is for. It's why Riveron over-turned those TDs.

The ball does not come out until he is on the ground LAYING DOWN! So, this means, his left knee has already hit the ground well earlier.

get it?

It's easily a half-3/4 of a second of time. It's a quick play, which is why it was missed and what replay is for. Otherwise, why have replay? Lewis never completely lost possession of the ball.

There is no way you can look at that very clear second video I just posted and try to continue to lie.

There is a reason why you keep trying to sell us some half baked video on the front end. It's the worst angle, distant and not the whole play, Mr. Disingenuous.

 

[Chris Stevenson]

There is a clear-as-day rule that I think some in here are not aware of:

If a player is in the process of going to the ground while trying to make a catch, he has to survive the ground or it is incomplete.

If a player is in the process of going to the ground while trying to recover a fumble, he has to survive the ground or it is still a loose ball.

He survived the ground. His left knee hit, he then was on his back ,and Jack ripped it out all in one motion.

When your down, as clear as that, it cannot be a fumble if Lewis still has the ball in his possession.

What you are you saying does not even apply unless Lewis shows to lose possession completely, with jostling, ball movement, etc.

 

[chasa]

The ball 100% clearly comes loose. It blows my mind that there can possibly anyone who disagrees with that fact.

Those people also:

1.) think the earth is flat
2.) Think Dan fouts is better then tony romo.
3.)Think jet fuel can't melt steel beams
4.)believe with a certainty that the moon landing was faked.
5.)Apparently believe the footage being posted of lewis losing control, was ALSO faked.

 

[Chris Stevenson]

If you pause the second video at 18 or 19 seconds, the proof that Lewis had it and was down, is that Jack's hand comes out, the ball stays firm, and only when Jack's knee hits the ball enough to jar it, does it come free, but Lewis had been down for far too long, as his left knee was the first thing to go down, well before what I described even happened.

You can't change the facts and the sequence.

The play is dead once Lewis is down. And, he clearly had firm possession of the ball at that time.