Now THAT'S a crap call

[Angry Ram]

The rule is you have to control the ball to the ground for it to be a catch.. he didn't... he extended it over the goal line and the ball jar loose when he hit the ground.

Even Romo was like OH NO when he say it.... Romo knew it also.

Yeah you were right RE - Tony Romo. Steelers were obviously panicked on 4th down, too. Fuckin rule needs to be changed though.

But damn. Heartbreaking. Broke the plane BEFORE the ball hit the ground. Of course the defense should've stopped a long ass drive on the drive before.

Some salt in my mouth after a great weekend.

 

[Ram65]

I saw that right away.. mistake by James... but that's the same rule that made Jimmy Graham's play incomplete.

Can't let the ball hit the ground when and lost control.

The refs could have MAYBE let it stand.. but unfortunately by the letter of the law it's incomplete.

He did bobble the ball and looks like he lost hold of it for a second. By rule that's a good call.

I don't like the rule.

 

[Ellard80]

As much as I hate the Pats, to me, he moves downward as part of the catch and therefore must
maintain control all the way to the ground. The incomplete pass call against Graham is a great example here because Graham had 4 or 5 steps forward before going to the ground.
Incomplete pass by James imo

Yeah same thing basically... some people on here are mistakenly thinking it matters if the ball crosses the goal line... it doesn't.

If i catch the ball with two feet down in the endzone and fall to the ground.. and then it pops out.. its incomplete. It doesn't matter that the ball crossed.

 

[majrleaged]

I’ve seen hundreds of plays where that exact thing happens and never been overturned

This call is CONSISTANT with what they have called in the past. Remember dallas lost in the playoffs because dez, instead of going down after the catch, stretched for the goal line. Ball came out when he hit the ground. He broke the plane of the goal, but because he was falling the whole time.....incomplete. This is the rule and I have seen it called just this way over and over. I have never seen it called differently. It's a bad rule, but not a bad call.

 

[Ellard80]

This call is CONSISTANT with what they have called in the past. Remember dallas lost in the playoffs because dez, instead of going down after the catch, stretched for the goal line. Ball came out when he hit the ground. He broke the plane of the goal, but because he was falling the whole time.....incomplete. This is the rule and I have seen it called just this way over and over. I have never seen it called differently. It's a bad rule, but not a bad call.

Yeah people are thinking of the times a running or reciever is running to the end zone and they dive over... it's not the same thing.

It's a dumb rule.. but on the otherhand I'm not sure how you are supposed to make the rule.

 

[jrry32]

This call is CONSISTANT with what they have called in the past. Remember dallas lost in the playoffs because dez, instead of going down after the catch, stretched for the goal line. Ball came out when he hit the ground. He broke the plane of the goal, but because he was falling the whole time.....incomplete. This is the rule and I have seen it called just this way over and over. I have never seen it called differently. It's a bad rule, but not a bad call.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8vCCsddtvs

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

It's like some of you guys don't know the rules. Just remember back to the dez Bryant no catch in the playoffs. If you're falling to the ground in process of catching the ball you must have control of the ball throughout. Doesn't matter where it happens on the field.

Another game given to the cheats by the opposition shooting themselves in the foot.

.

 

[Debacled]

Going to the ground you HAVE to hold onto the ball. Your own end zone, the scoring end zone, midfield.....anywhere it doesn't matter.

 

[jrry32]

Nah it's a bad interpretation of the rule but yeah the rule needs to be clarified even though they've tried multiple times over the last few years. That NFL competition committee is just a cancer.

The rule is stupid, and the NFL doesn't enforce it consistently enough. The process should be complete once a player makes a football move, regardless of whether he's going to the ground or not.

 

[Faceplant]

I had no doubt that was coming back. Megatron call. Correct as the rule states. Das OK. It will be a footnote in the historic first season of the McVay's Rams Dynasty. Moving on....

 

[badnews]

How can anyone not see that he had possession THEN makes a football move, lunges the ball over the endzone.... how is it hard to understand why that is a td....? and why a reception in the middle of the field is not at all the same?

The only reason there is ANY debate is soley because of terrible calls in other games that are now used to justify more terrible calls...

 

[Raptorman]

Yeah people are thinking of the times a running or reciever is running to the end zone and they dive over... it's not the same thing.

It's a dumb rule.. but on the otherhand I'm not sure how you are supposed to make the rule.

Yet, on the very next play the WR catches the ball, goes to the ground an the ball comes out. The clock continues to run and it's ruled a catch. Watch it. That to should have been an incomplete pass

 

[Merlin]

Unconscionable. To take those points wrongly at that junction of that important a game. It is hard to believe.

NFL needs to quit making refs the difference in so many key games with ignorant calls like this. Was the same BS last week in handing the Eagles their win in LA. It's out of control.

 

[OldSchool]

Further example of the problem the NFL has. This is a touchdown but the play for the Steelers wasn't? NO LOGIC!

 

[majrleaged]

The rule is stupid, and the NFL doesn't enforce it consistently enough. The process should be complete once a player makes a football move, regardless of whether he's going to the ground or not.

Your video seemed to show consistency. Golden Taint, not falling, but they still butchered the call. Just a different part of the catch rule mixed with the crossing the plane of the end zone rule.

 

[Debacled]

How can anyone not see that he had possession THEN makes a football move, lunges the ball over the endzone.... how is it hard to understand why that is a td....? and why a reception in the middle of the field is not at all the same?

The only reason there is ANY debate is soley because of terrible calls in other games that are now used to justify more terrible calls...

Again...possession doesn't matter when the receiver is going to the ground in the process of making a catch. If the ground knocks it loose and they don't repossess it before it hits the ground or they go out of bounds it is incomplete.

Key here is the going to the ground part

 

[jrry32]

Your video seemed to show consistency. Golden Taint, not falling, but they still butchered the call. Just a different part of the catch rule mixed with the crossing the plane of the end zone rule.

Golden Taint wasn't falling? That's news to me. He ended up on the ground without the ball. No, Golden Taint was falling, but the refs arbitrarily decided that he held it long enough to not be considered falling. Which made no sense at all while watching the play.

 

[majrleaged]

How can anyone not see that he had possession THEN makes a football move, lunges the ball over the endzone.... how is it hard to understand why that is a td....? and why a reception in the middle of the field is not at all the same?

The only reason there is ANY debate is soley because of terrible calls in other games that are now used to justify more terrible calls...

I agree, but the catch rule is in place because the refs already are calling to many judgement calls and they were trying to simplify the catch call. Go figure. I would change the rule to having the ball in your possession for 2 seconds. Then if it is knocked out it's a fumble and the ground can't cause a fumble. Mix in the goal line stuff, get ride of the thru the going to the ground stuff. Simple.

 

[jrry32]

Further example of the problem the NFL has. This is a touchdown but the play for the Steelers wasn't? NO LOGIC!

Russell Wilson wasn't going to the ground. That's what they'll say, except for the fact that he was going to the ground when his second foot hit. It's a nonsensical rule that is enforced inconsistently.

 

[fearsomefour]

True, and in most situations I would agree with this.

BUT...the ball broke the plane of the EZ. Play should dead right then and there.

If he was a running back or a runner in that situation it's a TD.
The way the rule is written it was not a completed catch. After the first replay I was saying it was incomplete.
What it means is the rule is inexcusably badly written.