It is currently Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:31 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 11:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 22141
jebrick wrote:
If the James play had happened in the EZ it would have been a TD. They have ruled that way several times. Once it is secured and the player is down it is a TD.

and it is why they need to change the rule. No one knows what a catch is.


When have they ruled it that way before?

I don't recall that.

_________________
“Your ability to think concisely, your ability to make good judgments is much easier on Thursday night than during the heat of the game."

"That Super Bowl was not won yesterday. It was won in a small room in Philadelphia, two weeks ago."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 2716
Jeemie wrote:
jebrick wrote:
If the James play had happened in the EZ it would have been a TD. They have ruled that way several times. Once it is secured and the player is down it is a TD.

and it is why they need to change the rule. No one knows what a catch is.


When have they ruled it that way before?

I don't recall that.


I can dig it up but there have been several. Cook's catch in the EZ where he then falls OOB and bobbles the ball. ODB catch where he get the ball knocked from his hands just after getting the 2nd foot down. There was a GBv Dallas game where the WR goes up and gets the ball, comes down on 2 feet then gets the ball knocked away. All TDs. all controversial.

_________________
"If Stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?" - Will Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 1:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 9161
Zeke5123 wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
Will-the-Shake wrote:
Whatever side one falls on the Jesse James catch/no catch debate, I think it’s pretty clear that the call would have stood has it occurred in the Super Bowl. NFL didn’t want anything offensively successful that looked like a clear touchdown to millions of people, and was called a touchdown on the field, micromanaged into a reversal, rewarding a defense that had failed on the play. I think the first of the two eagles touchdowns that went to review demonstrates this more than the second, where multiple steps were taken and a reversal would have been a travesty.


James did nothing like take multiple steps. Not even close. I still think posters thinking the reversal was obviously flawed are delusional.

If only the fucker had tucked and rolled.


Don’t be full of shit. Earlier in this thread you said there were many reasons to overturn and not overturn. You said it wasn’t a slam dunk. Now you are saying those arguing it shouldn’t be overturned are delusional?

It appears you are the delusional one. Put another way, you said it was ambiguous yet you still think it is delusional to be upset that an ambiguous was overturned?


No, I think others are delusional who think the catch was OBVIOUSLY not "overturnable." My personal opinion is that it's obvious it was a non-catch according to the rules. But I can see the plausibility of other arguments.

What's the point of posting if you can't be full of shit? You're sucking the fun out of board membership.

_________________
Frank Sinatra, Jr. 'Black Night'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdwl7X6Jruo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 1:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:08 pm
Posts: 5831
Still Lit wrote:
What's the point of posting if you can't be full of shit? You're sucking the fun out of board membership.
Wasn't there a box to check when signing up to steeler fury?

[ ] Full of Shit
[ ] Not Full of Shit*

*Clicking Not Full of Shit may affect acceptance of membership.

_________________
I wish Fraudlin would get testicular cancer and die after he watches me anally penetrate his wife. - Jeemie


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 1:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 2023
Still Lit wrote:
No, I think others are delusional who think the catch was OBVIOUSLY not "overturnable." My personal opinion is that it's obvious it was a non-catch according to the rules. But I can see the plausibility of other arguments.

What's the point of posting if you can't be full of shit? You're sucking the fun out of board membership.


Let's try to pin your argument. Do you think the argument turns on a reading of the rule, or application of the facts? Said another way, do you think the rule is clear and the only question is whether James did enough to become a runner, or do you think the rule is unclear and the facts are clear?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 2:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2017 11:22 pm
Posts: 218
The biggest problem is they could have ruled James catch a TD... and I doubt there would be any dispute. I believe they go looking for ways to call obvious catches "incomplete". Why - I don't know. Maybe it's the patriots, maybe it's just the lawyer in them, maybe they are just trying to prove how clever and smart they are. I don't know.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 2:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2017 11:22 pm
Posts: 218
Flanker wrote:
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.



I don't know, I think if you ask 100 NFL fans, they'd say it's a catch. I bet a lot of NE fans would have said they would have ruled it a catch. I know Bill Burr did the next day on the Mark Madden show.

In terms of any type of precedent - we don't really have a play like this. We have plays like Golden Tate catching a ball for a millisecond in the endzone before dropping it and having it intercepted and the play being called a TD... we have Gronk catching a ball and essentially sliding on the turf with the ball underneath him being called a TD. What we don't have is a guy catching a ball and twisting while lunging toward the endzone. This was a new situation, and the rule first reads that one body part (knee, elbow) is the same as two feet, but then only mentions second foot when determining a runner. The NFL could have easily interpreted the rule in the case of James that his single knee equaled the second foot as it does in the first part of the rule - I don't think anyone would have argued against that, and given the rest of the rule - it would have been a TD.

They could have also read the going to the ground rule to his knee being the initial contact with the ground - as the rule is essentially written for a diving catch or a leap. A guy falling to his knee has already caught the ball and made contact with the ground.

In fact, plenty of nonsense calls could be rectified if they simply read the english in the rule as it's written. Troy P's interception is a catch because he survives the initial contact with the ground - easy to understand, easy to rule.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], VASteel and 12 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