Official Pats/Colts Postgame thread

[FootballFan85]

Sorry, but you didn't see them clearly because they showed the angle of the front side of Faulk making the catch and he clearly had possession before being hit. Knowing that he was over the 30 yard line prior to being hit, it should have been a first down. So, yes, I can "objectively" say he got the first down.

So wait, you had some special camera angle that none of the other viewers across the nation had that gave you a clear view and angle that made it clear enough you could objectively say it was definitely a first down!?!?!?

AMAZING!

Where do I get these special views? What channel are they on?

 

[DaBruinz]

I'll lay this out for you DaBruinz just so you can see how blindered you are by your homerism.

NFL Videos: Patriots gamble and lose

There's the video for you to reference.

Listen, I know you aren't too bright, but that replay doesn't show Faulk bobbling the ball. I'm not blinded by homerism.

Here's a description of the possession rule:

That's not the applicable rule, by the way. That is the rule for balls along the sidelines..

Mmmk? So you can't be bobbling the ball, and you have to have BOTH feet down before it's a catch. So if you bobble the ball and then control it with one foot off the ground, it's still not a possession until you have BOTH feet down.

Now here's a post from a Colts board poster explaining why they're certain it was the RIGHT call (imagine that, they see the play different than you do!):

Both of Faulk's hands never left the ball. That's problem number 1. Number 2 is that, on forward progress, both feet don't have to be down. Faulk had possession of the ball PRIOR to being hit.

Read, and watch the video. Watch it over and over. Look at Faulk's feet. They're not planted, they're tapping around. You can see it clearly from the front view. He DOES bobble the ball and IF he does get two feet down WITH possession before he's brought down, it's basically a toe tap at best and a VERY close call..

I don't need to watch a video over and over that doesn't show Faulk bobbling the ball. Both feet don't have to be planted. Sorry. You need to go back and understand the rules better. Faulk had possession prior to being hit by Bullitt. The replay that shows Faulk's front side, showed it clearly even though that idiot Collingsworth was claiming that Faulk was juggling it.

Now I'm not saying it wasn't a first down. As I've said before in another thread, I personally think it was, but probably just by inches when you factor in that the bobble eliminates his foreward progress until he regains full possession.

Was it the wrong call? Maybe. Maybe not, but one thing is for certain, absolutely NOTHING about it was clear. Not even remotely close to clear. If you want to call that a clear possession and clear first down, then you my friend are too much of a homer for anyone to argue with logcially.

Can you really not admit that it was a razor close call and that the Pats put themselves in that situation by selecting that play and with no time outs should they need one?

I can admit the truth. That Faulk had clear possession of the ball before being hit by Bullitt. And that possession occured on the 1st down side of the 30. The official who claimed that Faulk juggled the ball was the official who did NOT have a clear view. In fact, he had NO VIEW of the ball, so there is no way he should have made that call..

It wasn't "razor close", contrary to your belief. It was a clear cut blown call.

 

[DaBruinz]

So wait, you had some special camera angle that none of the other viewers across the nation had that gave you a clear view and angle that made it clear enough you could objectively say it was definitely a first down!?!?!?

AMAZING!

Where do I get these special views? What channel are they on?

You mean the view that showed Faulk with full possession of the ball prior to being hit? The one where that Idiot Collingsworth was claiming Faulk was juggling the ball when he wasn't? It was one of the replay angles shown last night.

There is nothing amazing about it. You just chose to ignore reality.

 

[FootballFan85]

Listen, I know you aren't too bright, but that replay doesn't show Faulk bobbling the ball. I'm not blinded by homerism.

RIght...

That's not the applicable rule, by the way. That is the rule for balls along the sidelines..

There aren't seperate rules for what constitutes a catch depending on what part of the field you're on...

Both of Faulk's hands never left the ball. That's problem number 1. Number 2 is that, on forward progress, both feet don't have to be down. Faulk had possession of the ball PRIOR to being hit.

Again, watch the video. Can you ACTUALLY not see him bobble the ball or are you just ignoring it?

I don't need to watch a video over and over that doesn't show Faulk bobbling the ball. Both feet don't have to be planted. Sorry. You need to go back and understand the rules better. Faulk had possession prior to being hit by Bullitt. The replay that shows Faulk's front side, showed it clearly even though that idiot Collingsworth was claiming that Faulk was juggling it.

Again. Blinded by homerism.

I can admit the truth. That Faulk had clear possession of the ball before being hit by Bullitt. And that possession occured on the 1st down side of the 30. The official who claimed that Faulk juggled the ball was the official who did NOT have a clear view. In fact, he had NO VIEW of the ball, so there is no way he should have made that call..

It wasn't "razor close", contrary to your belief. It was a clear cut blown call.

It's sad when people have absolutely no objectivity what so ever. Every team has fans like that and I can't stand any of them.

 

[FootballFan85]

Dude, I just watched the video again. Just watch from 0:47 to 0:50 over and over. How can you not clearly see him get his hands on the ball up, then drop it, then regain it down low AS the tackle is being initiated?

Again like I said, I think its probably a first down by a hair, but the fact that youre even denying the bobble is hillarious.

 

[sieglo]

It probably wasn't a first down, although the ref that spotted it couldn't see if Faulk was bobbling it or not, since Faulk's back was to him -- a little fishy.

The bigger problem here is the tendency of BB teams to melt down under pressure. It's been happening against the Colts literally since the regular season game in 2003. Same thing, almost every time. I'm tired of it. It's a coaching issue.

 

[FootballFan85]

It probably wasn't a first down, although the ref that spotted it couldn't see if Faulk was bobbling it or not, since Faulk's back was to him -- a little fishy.

The bigger problem here is the tendency of BB teams to melt down under pressure. It's been happening against the Colts literally since the regular season game in 2003. Same thing, almost every time. I'm tired of it. It's a coaching issue.

Watch the video. You're right the ref was seeing his back, and that's exactly the problem, but for the spot, not for the juggle. THe initial contact he made with the ball was up at by head, the ref would've been able to see him get his hands on the ball up there and then lose it. He regains it down low, out of the refs sight.

So the ref could almost definitely see the bobble, but wouldn'tve been able to be exactly sure where he regains full possession, not to mention that he was on his toes which makes it an even more difficult call to make.

Like I said, if he gets clean control when he first touches the ball. It's a first down. But he doesn't and he forces the ref to make a very close judgement call which may or may not have gone the wrong way. Personally, I think it went the wrong way but only by a matter of inches.

 

[DaBruinz]

RIght...



There aren't seperate rules for what constitutes a catch depending on what part of the field you're on...


Again, watch the video. Can you ACTUALLY not see him bobble the ball or are you just ignoring it?




Again. Blinded by homerism.



It's sad when people have absolutely no objectivity what so ever. Every team has fans like that and I can't stand any of them.

Good for you. Leave. You can lie to yourself about my objectivity, but you're as clueless about that as you are about the possession rule. You see, there are different rules. On the sideline you have to have both feet in and you CAN be pushed out of bounds prior to getting your 2nd foot down and it's considered an incomplete pass. In the middle of the field, your 2nd foot doesn't have to hit the ground with forward progress when you have possession. Which Faulk did PRIOR to gettnig hit by Bullitt. THAT's what you need to understand. That's what you clearly don't.

 

[FootballFan85]

Good for you. Leave. You can lie to yourself about my objectivity, but you're as clueless about that as you are about the possession rule. You see, there are different rules. On the sideline you have to have both feet in and you CAN be pushed out of bounds prior to getting your 2nd foot down and it's considered an incomplete pass. In the middle of the field, your 2nd foot doesn't have to hit the ground with forward progress when you have possession. Which Faulk did PRIOR to gettnig hit by Bullitt. THAT's what you need to understand. That's what you clearly don't.

Lol. Leave? That's how I know that you know you're wrong. Because you're having little tantrums.

Are you actually still going to deny the bobble? Did you go back and rewatch 0:47 to 0:50 like I asked you to?

I'm guessing not.

You make the objective Pats fans around here look bad.

 

[FootballFan85]

P.S., Bruinz, here's the rule

"A player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball inbounds. To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted or recovered, a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet completely on the ground inbounds or any other part of his body, other than his hands, on the ground inbounds. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, there is no possession. This rule applies to the field of play and in the end zone."

I don't know where you get the idea that different parts of the field have different rules for catch and possession. Maybe you should learn the game a little. Sidelines, middle of the field, etc. It's all the same.

 

[ivanvamp]

P.S., Bruinz, here's the rule



I don't know where you get the idea that different parts of the field have different rules for catch and possession. Maybe you should learn the game a little. Sidelines, middle of the field, etc. It's all the same.

Not to get too involved in your pissing match here <g>, but let's think of a very real situation. A pass over the middle sails high and a receiver leaps to catch it right at his own 45 yard line. He leaves his feet, grabs the ball, but on his way down, the defender grabs him and shoves him back 3 yards, then the receiver's feet hit the ground and he falls down for a tackle. Where do you spot the ball? The 45 or the 42? This is not a complicated question, and this kind of thing happens every week in the NFL.

Now, to the other question of whether Faulk got the first down...I know you guys agree that he did. Look at that NFL video you linked to...stop it at 0:58. Faulk has already juggled it and has secured it at this point. His left foot is *barely* in front of the 30, but every other part of him, including the ball, is at or beyond the 30. In fact, he made the first down by a good half-yard easy. You know this because the other ref came in from the middle of the field to mark the spot, and he went close to the 31. Now, what's interesting is that of the two officials - the guy in the middle and the guy along the sideline - the only one that can clearly see when the ball is secured is the guy in the *middle*. So why didn't they confer to get the call right? Why did the sideline guy, *who can't even see when the ball is secured*, make the call?

That makes no sense at all. The more I see the replay, the more it becomes clear that not only did Faulk make it...he made it by plenty.

 

[upstater1]

So wait, you had some special camera angle that none of the other viewers across the nation had that gave you a clear view and angle that made it clear enough you could objectively say it was definitely a first down!?!?!?

AMAZING!

Where do I get these special views? What channel are they on?

They get them on the NFL channel. And that's why the analysts there all said it was a first down.

They showed the ref from the front side run in to mark the ball at the 31.

 

[JFK]

Can't blame the ref. They are humans.Most of us needed replays to see it should have been a first. BB messed up by burning timeouts.

 

[FootballFan85]

Not to get too involved in your pissing match here <g>, but let's think of a very real situation. A pass over the middle sails high and a receiver leaps to catch it right at his own 45 yard line. He leaves his feet, grabs the ball, but on his way down, the defender grabs him and shoves him back 3 yards, then the receiver's feet hit the ground and he falls down for a tackle. Where do you spot the ball? The 45 or the 42? This is not a complicated question, and this kind of thing happens every week in the NFL.

Now ask yourself the same question but imagine the receiver bobbles the ball midair. Where do you mark it? Not at the 45. He may have first touched it there, but that point ceases to exist as his forward progress because he doesn't have control.
You don't get possession when you meet just one of the factors laid out, you have to meet all of them, and like the rule says, if there is any doubt, it is NOT considered a possession.

You mark forward progress at the point the receiver has clear, full control of the football and has both feet or another part of his body clearly on the ground.

When Faulk bobbled the ball on the initial touch, he opened himself up to having the ref spot the ball where the ref decides he has full control. So again, if he catches it clean, it's going to be called a first. When he juggles it, now the ref has to try and make a judgement call on when he finally has complete control over it, and the refs unfortunately don't get to watch replays on the field unless it's challenged, which it wasn't.

Like I said, I think it was a 1st too, but not by much, and I can understand how the ref could make the mistake. It's not a huge botched call. It's a borderline call that probably went the wrong way, and because of the way they'd wasted their timeouts, the Pats had no chance to get it reviewed.

Now, to the other question of whether Faulk got the first down...I know you guys agree that he did. Look at that NFL video you linked to...stop it at 0:58. Faulk has already juggled it and has secured it at this point. His left foot is *barely* in front of the 30, but every other part of him, including the ball, is at or beyond the 30. In fact, he made the first down by a good half-yard easy. You know this because the other ref came in from the middle of the field to mark the spot, and he went close to the 31. Now, what's interesting is that of the two officials - the guy in the middle and the guy along the sideline - the only one that can clearly see when the ball is secured is the guy in the *middle*. So why didn't they confer to get the call right? Why did the sideline guy, *who can't even see when the ball is secured*, make the call?

That makes no sense at all. The more I see the replay, the more it becomes clear that not only did Faulk make it...he made it by plenty.

Again, I agree that it probably WAS a first down, but look at 0:58 like you said. Remember, it doesn't matter where his outstretched right leg is, it matters where the ball is. Logically, the ball is going to be near the center of his body. Now look down at the yellow line (which by the way is technically not official). Remember, the 30 isn't the first down, it's just past the 30. So if the ball is at the 30, it's the right call. Now it looks to me like the ball is just, JUST, at that yellow line. Assuming that is, that both his feet are down.

Again, I agree that is probably was just barely a first down, but how you guys can say it was clear cut and that he got it by a lot is beyond me.

 

[Bostonian1962]

Dude, I just watched the video again. Just watch from 0:47 to 0:50 over and over. How can you not clearly see him get his hands on the ball up, then drop it, then regain it down low AS the tackle is being initiated?

Again like I said, I think its probably a first down by a hair, but the fact that youre even denying the bobble is hillarious.

You're exactly right. The "bobble" is an instantaneous thing where the ball rolled half a turn, the instant the ball got to him. If you can freeze your TIVO's (some have that feature, some don't) to the instant after that "roll", when he has full possession, you will see that the ball was across the line of scrimmage.

Let's face it, this won't be the first time the refs miss the spot, they miss it all the time. This is one of the more important ones though.

 

[FootballFan85]

Here's a screen cap from 0:58 in the vid like you said. Are you really telling me his clearly and well beyond the 1st down line, and that you can clearly say both his feet are down? They don't seem to be in this still, and this is YOUR time, not mine. And remember, if you rotated this angle to be dead centre along the line, it would appear closer to the line than it is. That's just perspective and not arguable.



Cmon guys. I'm agreeing with you that it was probably a first, but can you guys really look at all of this and say that it wasnt a very close call, made by a human being on the field where they could have EASILY erred?

If you review it, maybe there's enough to overturn it, maybe not. But this was not some huge obvious botched call like the PI was. This was a very close call, with a lot of aspects (bobble, possession regain, feet down, tackle happening, etc), that had to be seen and judged by a human being, and not anything uncommon for the NFL. If the spot was missed, it was missed by inches, not feet. That happens ALL the time.

Maybe Faulk should've just caught the ball cleanly and this wouldn't be a discussion!

 

[DaBruinz]

Lol. Leave? That's how I know that you know you're wrong. Because you're having little tantrums.

Are you actually still going to deny the bobble? Did you go back and rewatch 0:47 to 0:50 like I asked you to?

I'm guessing not.

You make the objective Pats fans around here look bad.

*ROFLMAO* There is no "little tantrum." You're the person who can't get it through your head that Faulk had possession when he came down with the ball. Period. End of story.

BTW, You've got no clue what objectivity is.

 

[upstater1]

Dude, I just watched the video again. Just watch from 0:47 to 0:50 over and over. How can you not clearly see him get his hands on the ball up, then drop it, then regain it down low AS the tackle is being initiated?

Again like I said, I think its probably a first down by a hair, but the fact that youre even denying the bobble is hillarious.

Did you watch the game?

That video you're watching does not show the clear replay they showed during the game when Faulk immediately snagged the ball a fraction of a second after the initial little bobble.

In fact, that clip proves it was a first down when synched up with this video because Faulk secures the ball before the defender swipes at it, and in this video the defender swipes at it long before Faulk goes backwards.

You are totally wrong.

 

[upstater1]

Here's a screen cap from 0:58 in the vid like you said. Are you really telling me his clearly and well beyond the 1st down line, and that you can clearly say both his feet are down? They don't seem to be in this still, and this is YOUR time, not mine. And remember, if you rotated this angle to be dead centre along the line, it would appear closer to the line than it is. That's just perspective and not arguable.



Cmon guys. I'm agreeing with you that it was probably a first, but can you guys really look at all of this and say that it wasnt a very close call, made by a human being on the field where they could have EASILY erred?

If you review it, maybe there's enough to overturn it, maybe not. But this was not some huge obvious botched call like the PI was. This was a very close call, with a lot of aspects (bobble, possession regain, feet down, tackle happening, etc), that had to be seen and judged by a human being, and not anything uncommon for the NFL. If the spot was missed, it was missed by inches, not feet. That happens ALL the time.

Maybe Faulk should've just caught the ball cleanly and this wouldn't be a discussion!

First off, during the game they showed the replay close up of Faulk securing the ball.

Second, what in the world does "feet down" got to do with this discussion?

Feet down is totally irrelevant.

 

[FootballFan85]

That video is FROM THE game. You can clearly hear Al and Chris talking. It is literally exactly what was shown on NBC.