It wasn't a mother loving catch!

JJ's was way more of a catch than Butch Johnson's!

And that's my totally unbiased opinion.

 

It was one play that didn't go our way. It didn't define the outcome of the game. We squandered opportunities before that play. We squandered opportunities after.

 

Nothing could be further from the truth. That play absolutely defined the outcome of the game.

 

It was the defining play of the game. The Pat's had SEVERAL playes overturned against the Bills yesterday when the game was still being decided. Talking heads spout ne had no trouble with the Bills. Truth is, during a critical 10 minute period during the game while the game was being decided, a 17 point advantage was given ne compliments of rg, kraft, and the evil empire.

 

I think you meant to say it was only the drop...

 

Another TD called incomplete in the bills pats game yesterday, I watched that game and the bills had an obvious TD until the refs stole it from them, which was a major turning point in that game:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...parks-anger-confusion/?utm_term=.54481375db4f

 

I'm so over this-I'm focused on today's game against the Texans and should the team.

 

strummer: You have a keen eye and and valid insight on these type plays. How do you see this TD? This was Cook's catch. [wk3 vs Texans 4thQ 28" left]

https://www.sbnation.com/2017/9/26/16364372/brandin-cooks-touchdown-catch-rule

Not sure this video works but it is correct. This site also has numerous videos of the JJ TD. Uhh! At least they say so.

This play was mentioned in a earlier post but I did not see a video on it there.

 

I haven’t watched the video, but this appears to be the relevant part to me and a clear difference between the James incompletion and this catch. James lost control and the ball also hit the ground.

 

IDK, if we hadn’t had a Chinese fire drill on the next play, I’m not sure we would be talking about this as much.

 

But we did.

 

Clearly Strummer has his own opinion, right WRONG or otherwise. The NFL is parsing the definition of a catch to need a microscope. There is NO mention of "surviving the ground" in the NFL rules, although that seems to be their point of contention. Bottom line is in the definition of "surviving" the ground..... and football moves.... James had effectively made contact with the ground with 5 body parts before the ball broke the plane and slightly shifted, well beyond the NFL definition of "initial contact with the ground". The bottom line is that the JJ TD should have stood as called by the refs.

 

And we are

 

The problem with the rule is it never defines when possession has been made. If we can all agree that JJ had caught the ball and had possession of the ball, did he break the plane? If the answers are yes he caught the ball, yes he had clear possession and yes he broke the plane, than the fact that he "didnt survive the ground" is BS and bad for football. Its bad for the fans and its bad for the players.

 

Yes, more specifically they don't define the endpoint of 'initial contact.' All the rulebook says is maintaining control after initial contact. Common sense and basic logic tells you that one event should end when another begins, like purposefully reaching for the goalline should signal the end of initial contact. But the NFL doesn't see things sensibly or logically, and instead initial contact ends at the discretion of Al Riveron.

I guarantee you that they will amend the rules in the offseason to specifically define the end of initial contact, and that rule retroactively applied will show that JJ had the touchdown.

 

This video is favorable to James and contradicts strummerfan's photo

https://247sports.com/nfl/pittsburg...ames-incorrectly-reversed-touchdown-112613439

This video posted earlier absolutely reverses the Cook ruling


https://www.sbnation.com/2017/9/26/16364372/brandin-cooks-touchdown-catch-rule

 

Only if you completely ignore the part where you can see the left hand come off the football. That arrow doesn’t show jack.

 

Wrong. If that was the case, there would be one play for each team and whoever does the most with their one play wins. By putting the entire outcome of the game on one play, you delude the efforts and impact of every other play before and after. If that was the last play of the game, you would have a weak argument. But since we could have still tied the game with a chip shot field goal, that play is just like any other.

 

And yet the game is played for 60 minutes. It wasn't a game winning catch. It wasn't even a touchdown. JJ's knee was clearly down before the ball crossed the plane. Who is to say that we score there? The bad call to overturn the catch didn't take points off the board because the correct overturn would have put him down at the one.

Our defense played better than expected against Brady and our offense kept the game within striking distance. There was a lot of good football played before that pass. We could have been down 17 points at that point. Would that have been the defining play if the game was out of reach? No. And it wasn't defining as it stood, either.

 

We'll agree to disagree, then. I think boiling down an entire football game into one play is moronic. It's short sighted and illogical. And I can point out other instances even more defining.

But whatever. Live in that bubble.