Pittsburgh Troll Agrees With Overturning the TD

[FourierSeries]

The Patriots just beat the Steelers on the road. For you to claim that isn’t impressive is more an insult to your own team than to NE.

I actually completely agree with @Gatekeeper. Beating Pittsburgh is not that impressive at all. I was saying before the game that his team is a complete fraud and that this was a guaranteed victory for NE.

Only reason it came down to the wire is because NE was more injured than I expected.

If both teams get key players back for the rematch, NE wins by 20+ in Foxboro.

@Gatekeeper - hopefully your team gets far enough for a rematch. I love watching NE slap their *****es around.

 

[jam757]

So I just "discussed" the catch rule with a Steelers fan for ten minutes. He is sort of a work related friend of mine so I really wasn't going to get in an argument but he basically said:
1. it was not "clear evidence" that he lost control of the ball...hmmmm, not sure about that as the ball spins and his hands are not under it
2. His knee was down and he clearly made a football move... we've been through this, NOT part of the rule
3. As soon as the ball crossed the goal line the play was over... sigh

Anyway, after that we talked about what to do to make things better and the best solution he could come up with was keep the rules the same on the rest of the field and alter the rule for goal line plays. In thinking about this more I am not even sure how that would work.

 

[Bruins29]

Anyway, after that we talked about what to do to make things better

Have Steelers fans learn to read and comprehend things. That would be a start.

 

[jam757]

To satisfy those that don’t like the rule you would have to change it to if you break the plane WHILE IN THE PROCESS OF GAINING POSSESSION you are awarded a a TD even if you never ultimately gain possession. That would create epic disaster.
By that rule getting 2 hands on the ball in the end zone and dropping it would be a TD.


Otherwise people just need to listen when they are told that a player attempting to make a catch does not have possession until he completes the catch and therefore did not break the plane while in possession of the football.

I think people biggest problem with this is they feel he did have possession and then turned to extend past the line. I agree though it opens up a huge can of worms. I thought the Dez Bryant one was actually less controversial than this one, although both quite similar.

 

[Ring 6]

I think people biggest problem with this is they feel he did have possession and then turned to extend past the line. I agree though it opens up a huge can of worms. I thought the Dez Bryant one was actually less controversial than this one, although both quite similar.

But “people” not understanding the rule is the problem, not anything about the rule.

You do not have possession on a pass until you complete the catch. That would involve establishing in bounds before going out of bounds, being down by contact, running with the ball after catching it, and/or in the event the catch involved going to the ground, maintaining control all the way through landing.

Very often when a player goes to the ground while making a catch the ball comes out. So you need a rule. There are 2 choices. Either that is a fumble because possession occurs before hitting the ground or it is incomplete because as the current rule states you have not completed the catch and therefore earned possession until you maintain it through hitting the ground.

James went to the ground while making the catch. If you want to change the rule be prepared for a couple hundred more fumbles per year.
Bottom line is by rule, and the only really logical way to write the rule James never caught the football.

 

[Ring 6]

So I just "discussed" the catch rule with a Steelers fan for ten minutes. He is sort of a work related friend of mine so I really wasn't going to get in an argument but he basically said:
1. it was not "clear evidence" that he lost control of the ball...hmmmm, not sure about that as the ball spins and his hands are not under it
2. His knee was down and he clearly made a football move... we've been through this, NOT part of the rule
3. As soon as the ball crossed the goal line the play was over... sigh

Anyway, after that we talked about what to do to make things better and the best solution he could come up with was keep the rules the same on the rest of the field and alter the rule for goal line plays. In thinking about this more I am not even sure how that would work.

That suggestion says lower the difficulty of a catch if it’s fot a TD. That seems nuts.

I don’t think there is any need or even a way if there was a need to make the rule better. The rule is fine. It’s clear, easy to call and only controversial when it gets called at a critical time do fans can whine that it’s a bad rule.

 

[jam757]

That suggestion says lower the difficulty of a catch if it’s fot a TD. That seems nuts.

I don’t think there is any need or even a way if there was a need to make the rule better. The rule is fine. It’s clear, easy to call and only controversial when it gets called at a critical time do fans can whine that it’s a bad rule.

And there lies the problem. Across, the nation, fans and media are universally blasting this rule (which they still don't really seem to understand). People seem to hate it. But how do you change it to make the game better? Very, very tricky. More importantly, I still say the pass interference penalty needs to be added to replay and the spot foul on pass interference needs to be changed to 15 yards at most.

 

[Ring 6]

And there lies the problem. Across, the nation, fans and media are universally blasting this rule (which they still don't really seem to understand). People seem to hate it. But how do you change it to make the game better? Very, very tricky. More importantly, I still say the pass interference penalty needs to be added to replay and the spot foul on pass interference needs to be changed to 15 yards at most.

They hate the rule because they don’t understand the rule. You can develop rules based upon what misinformed people think.
There is no real way to change this rule without creating worse outcries. If you call that a catch then you have to call a receiver bobbling the ball into the end zone, having split second possession along the way and dropping it, a TD. Lee Evans catch that sterling Moore knocked away would have put the ravens in the SB ON A DROPPED PASS.
You can’t change a rule to address the belief “he was close give it to him” without opening up giving it to the ones that aren’t close.

As far as reviewing DPI, no thanks that will only make it wise.
Then the ones that are called will be reviewed and the ones that are missed will not. Refs will end up throwing the flag whenever in doubt because that’s the only way to get a review there will be many more DPI calls most of which won’t get challenged.

 

[jam757]

They hate the rule because they don’t understand the rule. You can develop rules based upon what misinformed people think.
There is no real way to change this rule without creating worse outcries. If you call that a catch then you have to call a receiver bobbling the ball into the end zone, having split second possession along the way and dropping it, a TD. Lee Evans catch that sterling Moore knocked away would have put the ravens in the SB ON A DROPPED PASS.
You can’t change a rule to address the belief “he was close give it to him” without opening up giving it to the ones that aren’t close.

As far as reviewing DPI, no thanks that will only make it wise.
Then the ones that are called will be reviewed and the ones that are missed will not. Refs will end up throwing the flag whenever in doubt because that’s the only way to get a review there will be many more DPI calls most of which won’t get challenged.

Yeah you're probably right about DPI and review. I do know that Belichick believes in adding to the scope of reviews but it would probably just slow the game down. I still don't agree with the play where the ball is thrown up and the receiver fights back through the defender and its a spot foul. I think a 15 yard penalty would be an improvement even though we'd see more intentional penalties to prevent TD's.

 

[Ring 6]

Yeah you're probably right about DPI and review. I do know that Belichick believes in adding to the scope of reviews but it would probably just slow the game down. I still don't agree with the play where the ball is thrown up and the receiver fights back through the defender and its a spot foul. I think a 15 yard penalty would be an improvement even though we'd see more intentional penalties to prevent TD's.

Every rule gets manipulated. The intentional underthrow is an example but I think you don’t see it nearly as much any more because the refs give more leeway.