It is currently Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:22 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
Author Message
 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: 233
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: 233
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 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dan of still97, DP39, merlin86 and 31 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