It is currently Sat Nov 17, 2018 1:27 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:24 am
Posts: 3023
Donnie Brasco wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
Pretty sure metaphysical certainty is not the bar for overturning a call.

.


You're right- it says VIDEO EVIDENCE. Which there is NONE.

Again I implore you to find an angle where the ball and grass meet. You can't and no one else can.

It's not that difficult to grasp... surprising as you are an uber logician


Here's what I think happened. The ref saw the ball hit the ground but wasn't thinking about "survive the ground" rule at the time. Called TD. They then reviewed specific to the "survive the ground" rule. When they determined that James wasn't a runner and was thus subject to this asinine rule, they didn't bother to check whether the ball hit the ground as the ref had seen it.

Either that or they got lost in the moment and didn't bother to properly review the play. Or there is a big conspiracy against the wildly popular steelers in favor of the wildly unpopular Patriots.

_________________
#IDrinkandIKnowThings


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2014 1:23 pm
Posts: 3396
The Survive The Ground Rule is a piece of horseshit and the cause of overturned catches that would have affected the outcome of big games, such as the Outlaw catch, Dez catch, and Megatron catch.

It's not a good rule and Nobody (except maybe the owners who created it?) likes it. It will be changed this off-season.

https://247sports.com/nfl/pittsburgh-st ... -114369943


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:10 am
Posts: 967
Get rid of replay and call it on the field.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23382
Lifelongsteel wrote:
Donnie Brasco wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
Pretty sure metaphysical certainty is not the bar for overturning a call.

.


You're right- it says VIDEO EVIDENCE. Which there is NONE.

Again I implore you to find an angle where the ball and grass meet. You can't and no one else can.

It's not that difficult to grasp... surprising as you are an uber logician


Here's what I think happened. The ref saw the ball hit the ground but wasn't thinking about "survive the ground" rule at the time. Called TD. They then reviewed specific to the "survive the ground" rule. When they determined that James wasn't a runner and was thus subject to this asinine rule, they didn't bother to check whether the ball hit the ground as the ref had seen it.

Either that or they got lost in the moment and didn't bother to properly review the play. Or there is a big conspiracy against the wildly popular steelers in favor of the wildly unpopular Patriots.


They reviewed the play for three and a half minutes. They didn’t miss out on anything.

_________________
“A set of several simple rules leads to complex, intelligent behavior. While a set of complex rules often leads to dumb and primitive behavior.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 3:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23382
Jackie Chiles wrote:
Get rid of replay and call it on the field.


There’s nothing wrong with replay of the original intent of replay is properly understood and followed...which is to overturn obvious errors like Mel Renfro in the AFCCG.

The problem is when they study a replay for 10 minutes frame by frame looking for the tiniest thing.

_________________
“A set of several simple rules leads to complex, intelligent behavior. While a set of complex rules often leads to dumb and primitive behavior.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 6:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 6980
Jackie Chiles wrote:
Get rid of replay and call it on the field.

This cannot be said enough.

_________________
"They're standing around, Butz!" - Kevin O'Shea


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 6:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:35 pm
Posts: 7818
Jobus Rum wrote:
Jackie Chiles wrote:
Get rid of replay and call it on the field.

This cannot be said enough.

This cannot be argued with enough. As Jeemie said, there should be replay for the most egregious of errors, we just need to get rid of the nit picking.

_________________
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
--Voltaire


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:05 pm
Posts: 248
franco32 wrote:
You can't GUESS it touched grass because you think James fingers are too small. You can't be 99.9% sure.


in·dis·put·a·ble

unable to be challenged or denied

Image

Is it not unable to be challenged or denied that human fingers are not long enough to prevent the bottom third of the ball from contacting the ground? I dont think you need to see the ball touchng the ground in this situation if you use common sense... In my opinion it is indisputable that the ball touched the ground.

I think we all know the ball touched the ground.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 4040
You can absolutely challenge the assertion that the ball hit the ground. You have to see pigskin touch grass -- without fingers underneath -- otherwise you can't overturn it. It's that simple. If you don't think that is a good standard, then take it up with the NFL.

By the way, I think it is more likely than not that the ball DID hit the ground. But, based on the video, I can't say that with absolute certainty. Call should have stood. If not, why have a rule book?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23382
franco32 wrote:
You can absolutely challenge the assertion that the ball hit the ground. You have to see pigskin touch grass -- without fingers underneath -- otherwise you can't overturn it. It's that simple. If you don't think that is a good standard, then take it up with the NFL.

By the way, I think it is more likely than not that the ball DID hit the ground. But, based on the video, I can't say that with absolute certainty. Call should have stood. If not, why have a rule book?


Dude...the tip of the football touched the ground...was clear from the video.

And unless Jesse James has hugely deformed ring and pinky fingers, he wasn’t holding it.

Just stop it, OK?

_________________
“A set of several simple rules leads to complex, intelligent behavior. While a set of complex rules often leads to dumb and primitive behavior.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 4040
It's not clear from the video at all. You have to be Superman with x-ray vision to see through James forearm. I'm not. The very fact we are having this discussion...two reasonable posters...is proof that there was not indisputable evidence.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23382
franco32 wrote:
It's not clear from the video at all. You have to be Superman with x-ray vision to see through James forearm. I'm not. The very fact we are having this discussion...two reasonable posters...is proof that there was not indisputable evidence.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.


One of the reasonable posters is looking at the evidence with homer glasses on... 8-)

https://goo.gl/images/EWYKAy

_________________
“A set of several simple rules leads to complex, intelligent behavior. While a set of complex rules often leads to dumb and primitive behavior.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 11:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:05 pm
Posts: 248
franco32 wrote:
If you don't think that is a good standard, then take it up with the NFL.


Actually, in reality... YOU need to take it up with the NFL as they ruled it incomplete which anyone with vision and a non-bias opinion would agree with.

The ball touched the ground bro get over it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 7:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2014 4:50 pm
Posts: 4520
They need to simplify the rule.

Once the ball breaks the goal line it’s a touchdown PERIOD. That’s a runner or a receiver. It’s instantaneous. Example- James scores in that scenario. So does the Eagles player. It’s seems like a simple solution unless I am missing something.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 7:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:52 pm
Posts: 7327
Suwanee88 wrote:
They need to simplify the rule.

Once the ball breaks the goal line it’s a touchdown PERIOD. That’s a runner or a receiver. It’s instantaneous. Example- James scores in that scenario. So does the Eagles player. It’s seems like a simple solution unless I am missing something.


That...AND....two feet in, ball never hits ground, it's a catch. No more of this bullshit of whether ball moves a millimeter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 7:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 9851
Jeemie wrote:
One of the reasonable posters is looking at the evidence with homer glasses on... 8-)


Agreed.

But it was such a heart-breaking play.

28 seconds left.

The money was paid, the groceries were bagged, and we were headed out the door with the kids to the minivan.

And then the security alarm went off.

Another frustrating aspect for me is that his elbow looks to be down at the goal line with the ball at or over the line and he still had control at that point.

Gah! What a shitty end to the season not to have another crack at those bastards.

_________________
Orangesteel wrote:
We could have ended the game there and Tomlin’s band of assholes let them back in.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23382
swissvale72 wrote:
Suwanee88 wrote:
They need to simplify the rule.

Once the ball breaks the goal line it’s a touchdown PERIOD. That’s a runner or a receiver. It’s instantaneous. Example- James scores in that scenario. So does the Eagles player. It’s seems like a simple solution unless I am missing something.


That...AND....two feet in, ball never hits ground, it's a catch. No more of this bullshit of whether ball moves a millimeter.


We don’t go to Super Bowl XXX if the current rule is in force, as Ernie Mills dropped the ball when he fell OOB at the one.

Somehow the NFL survived for decades without this rule, and yet everyone knew what a catch was.

_________________
“A set of several simple rules leads to complex, intelligent behavior. While a set of complex rules often leads to dumb and primitive behavior.”


Last edited by Jeemie on Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:52 pm
Posts: 7327
Jeemie wrote:
swissvale72 wrote:
Suwanee88 wrote:
They need to simplify the rule.

Once the ball breaks the goal line it’s a touchdown PERIOD. That’s a runner or a receiver. It’s instantaneous. Example- James scores in that scenario. So does the Eagles player. It’s seems like a simple solution unless I am missing something.


That...AND....two feet in, ball never hits ground, it's a catch. No more of this bullshit of whether ball moves a millimeter.


We don’t go to Super Bowl XXX if the current rule is in force, as Ernie Mills dropped the fall when he fell OOB at the one.

Somehow the NFL survived for decades without this rule, and yet everyone knew what a catch was.


That's true!! Or if replay was in to see Kordell Stewart go OOB, come back in to catch a TD pass.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 4040
Jeemie wrote:
franco32 wrote:
It's not clear from the video at all. You have to be Superman with x-ray vision to see through James forearm. I'm not. The very fact we are having this discussion...two reasonable posters...is proof that there was not indisputable evidence.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.


One of the reasonable posters is looking at the evidence with homer glasses on... 8-)

https://goo.gl/images/EWYKAy


Um, that picture shows an instant in time when he has two hands on the football. The ball is allowed to touch the ground if he is holding it. There is nothing conclusive about it. You need video or frame by frame in order to assess whether it was a catch.

Besides, I didn't know the NFL replay officials were allowed to consult with endzone photographers to try to establish the indisputable nature of a call. Now you are reaching to 3rd party evidence to try to support the NFL's review. You might as well stop the game completely at that point and seize all sideline cameras for additional possible evidence. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23382
franco32 wrote:
Jeemie wrote:
franco32 wrote:
It's not clear from the video at all. You have to be Superman with x-ray vision to see through James forearm. I'm not. The very fact we are having this discussion...two reasonable posters...is proof that there was not indisputable evidence.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.


One of the reasonable posters is looking at the evidence with homer glasses on... 8-)

https://goo.gl/images/EWYKAy


Um, that picture shows an instant in time when he has two hands on the football. The ball is allowed to touch the ground if he is holding it. There is nothing conclusive about it. You need video or frame by frame in order to assess whether it was a catch.

Besides, I didn't know the NFL replay officials were allowed to consult with endzone photographers to try to establish the indisputable nature of a call. Now you are reaching to 3rd party evidence to try to support the NFL's review. You might as well stop the game completely at that point and seize all sideline cameras for additional possible evidence. :D



If you think he’s “holding the ball” there, you are using your homer glasses that show he has the longest pinky and ring fingers in existence.

And the refs had that angle. They could see it hit the ground, and they could see the ball move when it hit the ground.

_________________
“A set of several simple rules leads to complex, intelligent behavior. While a set of complex rules often leads to dumb and primitive behavior.”


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 20 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
FORUM RULES --- PRIVACY POLICY




Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group