It wasn't a mother loving catch!

Agree and disagree.

Agree with being penalized for trying to make a catch.

Disagree with the letter of the law. You're right that reaching for the gl should be considered a football move (it is) but the NFL is just blatantly disregarding that little nuisance to justify the call. I mean that IS the rule afterall.

 

By the rules it is a catch. To survive the ground you have to be touched bu the defender which James was not touched till he dove over the line.
1. he caught the ball.
2. went to his knees established himself still holding the ball.
3. Pulled the ball toward him (thats a football move)
4. Stuck the ball over the goal line (also a football move) when the ball crosses the line that is a touchdown
5. You can't tell if his hand is under the ball or not however, at this point it is already a TD o doesn't matter.
If you don't agree, pack your CHIT and move to Boston
Other n that. Everyone have a Merry Christmas! and a Happy New Year

 

Don't they have enough CHIT in Boston already?

 

You have to maintain control long enough, and that is clearly defined in the rulebook as making a football move, which he did, which Al Riverton admitted to.

Initial contact should end with the reach, he then becomes a runner. After that he breaks the plane and it's immediately a dead ball. Control doesn't matter at that point.

This is close, but FAR different than had James been falling and his momentum carried the ball into the EZ without him reaching. In that case, you're right and the call would be correct. It really comes down to the reach being a football move. I know it seems like minutiae but it makes ALL the difference in the world.

 

Sorry, but you're wrong.

I'll be staying down here in the land of god, guns, and football thank you very much.

 

No he didn't.

Roethlisberger completes a pass to James, and James is going to the ground as he reaches the goal line,” Riveron said. “That’s the key here. He is going to the ground. By rule, to complete the process of the catch, he must survive the ground. By that, we mean he must maintain control of the football. . . . He does put the ball over the goal line extended. Once he gets there, he loses control of the football, and then the ball hits the ground. . . . So therefore, two things occur: He loses control of the football, and the ball touches the ground prior to him regaining control. Therefore, the ruling on the field of a touchdown was changed to an incomplete pass.”

As I said before deflect and dissect to your heart's content.

 

Touchdown !!!!

 

Try posting the still shots after the first and before the last pic. I saw those on that satire site as well. Seriously grasping at straws

 

Did you read his quote in this link where he says........ "he does make another move where he’s reaching for pay dirt?" and admits that it is a football move.

https://247sports.com/nfl/pittsburg...gh-Steelers-TE-Jesse-James-overturn-112637625

Why can't you admit that reaching the ball is a football move? It's really not that hard. Al Riverton has done it, but he just goes on to say that it doesn't matter which is just astonishing and absurd. He's saying that the rule that establishes a player as a runner doesn't matter. Why not? And when you recognize that he's a runner, once he breaks the plane the ball is dead and whether or not it comes loose is a moot point.

Quite simply...

catches ball and has possession
initial contact, knee hits ground
FULL STOP since he makes a football move establishing himself as a runner.
Ball breaks plane, TD, dead ball
Everything after that doesn't matter.

If you want to accept the indisputable fact that the head of officiating is blatantly ignoring a rule to justify the call, then so be it.

 

I agree with pictures. In many cases you can stop a video and take a screencap to show anything that you want.

I just think everything that happened after the goalline doesn't matter.

 

They care too much about the steps a player takes after a catch.

In this instance he didn't need to take steps he was already at the goaline.

 

SHOULDN'T matter

 

The argument I've heard from actual NFL players is...it's a catch because JJ caught the ball, while holding the ball , he turned, leaped , knee and elbow hits ground, ball still in control, ball is stretched across goal line. = TD. He caught the ball, made a football move, and crossed the plane...all while having total control of the ball. A knee and elbow is equivalent to your feet taking steps. turning and lunging is a football move.

also there is no rule that says the ball can't touch the ground. Sure it moved an inch when it hit the ground but his hand was still on the ball. All of which IMO is a moot point since he caught it, turned, lunged into the endzone, ball crosses plane, knee and elbow are on the ground. This is a TD by all measures but the one idea that he needed to not let the ball touch the ground and have it move while doing so. That's the leap that IMO is crazy BS.

 

I agree coast... Been saying the same thing but sinc everyone is saying by rule this or that, I'm simply saying if it's a TD for every other position than receiver then that rule or whatever rules need to be changed. Because that was a by gum TD!!!

Don't know if you're mistaking me for someone else, but I ain't moving anywhere my brother.

 

Do you actually read before you post? He does not admit it was a football move. From your own link.

An actual quote as opposed to something you made up and added quotations marks to.

"So, yes, the knee was down, he does make another move where he’s reaching for pay dirt. Once he reaches for pay dirt, he loses control of the football. Before he regains control of the football, it touches the ground. Therefore, it was an incomplete pass. This is not so much about a football move, it’s about going to the ground. In the process of going to the ground, you must survive the ground via having control of the football upon the initial contact with the ground.”

 

This is exactly right and exactly what Al Riverton says doesn't matter. Read the link.

https://247sports.com/nfl/pittsburg...gh-Steelers-TE-Jesse-James-overturn-112637625


He says it wasn't a football move, then goes on to describe a football move, then says that it's not about a football move. He's all over the map.

That would be like you witnessing a vehicle run a traffic light, hit a car, then drive off. In your statement to the police, you say "It wasn't a truck. It was a one of those large vehicles that you see towing a trailer on the interstate, but it definitely wasn't a truck."

 

See post above this one ^^^^^

 

and your picture shows nothing to prove when in the timeline it is taken but you are spouting off as if it settles things and telling everyone they are wrong.

 

It's obvious that the guy made a snap decision that given time to dissect it, is proven wrong. He's now left to either admit the mistake, or try like hell to justify it even if it means ignoring other rules to do so. He's chosen B. That's fine because they're not going to change the outcome of the game, and if Mike Mitchell doesn't leave Sean Davis one on one vs Gronk on the 2pt, a FG wins the game and were not talking about this. I won't even crucify the guy for making a mistake. He's human. But his defense of it is laughable.

 

Why is it 'not so much about a football move?' Because he says so? The rulebook says otherwise. You're accepting his explanation. Most of us don't as it defies what is written.

 

An issue that IMO is much bigger a deal then anyone seems to think...the inconsistency. Officials have now screwed the patriots opponents 3X. Jets, Texans, Steelers. All 3 just happen to go in NE's favor... one of which had a similar scenario where the ball clearly hits the ground and is trapped.

I'll make the point again... if the "house" is betting on the Patriots to cover a spread or just win... is it a crazy idea to think bribes are being offered to officials? It's happened in every major sport on earth. Is this game so pure that it couldn't happen? There's more $ in the NFL then any sport period.

 

It certainly does settle things.

A. He didn't maintain control of the ball
B. The ball hit the ground

https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/12/17/p...nd-patriots-overturned-touchdown-interception

You can clearly see in the video his hand inverted as in my screencap.


And here is Mike P. on the question of crossing the goal line..

 

Your wasting your time man. You're not allowed to have a difference of opinion with some of the thick headed posters around here....I can think of one in particular . I don't know why we are even still discussing it .The refs ruled it wasn't a catch so they can't be wrong. To me the debate is football move ,which it clearly
was so therefore the ball touching the ground is irrelevant even though the thick heads keep chiming in about the ball touching the ground. Anyone who doesn't believe the double standard just doesn't want to see it.....Cooks/JJ. Same criteria....same judge.....different ruling........joke.

There is no sense discussing it ,maybe I'll just head over to the " beer thread" so someone can tell me what beer I should be drinking for Christmas........by the way Merry Christmas to all....I do mean all.

 

Did he maintain control of the ball? No, you can't deny that.

Did the ball touch the ground before he regained control? Yes, you can't deny that either.

It doesn't matter how you try to decode or decipher what he said or which quotes you choose to make up. Those two things are irrefutable. The rules sucks, but that doesn't change the fact the rule was applied correctly.

 

For the Bazillionth time.......IT DOESN"T MATTER IF THE BALL TOUCHED THE GROUND OR IF HE REGAINED CONTROL since the ball is DEAD as soon as it crosses the goalline (it WAS under control at that point). And the reason that it is dead is because he established himself as a runner by REACHING the ball over the goalline. And he established himself as a runner, because he made a football move (reaching), satisfying the criteria that he have control after initial contact (knee hitting ground). Ok, I've now worked the scenario backwards for you, but I doubt that you'll get it.


Wait a minute it just occurred to me that this IS Al Riverton, isn't it? You've created an account here to justify your call. Got it.

I give up.

You win.