Ball breaks plane...touchdown! End. Done. Over.

[ForeverRoyalKC]

The idiot rules, that's within the NFL, are ridiculous. Here's how you fix the "catch" rule. If ball breaks plane of goalline, touchdown! No "to the ground", no "control to the ground", no "must follow thru!"
If you extend, reach, run over, fly over, etc. Ball touches/breaks plane, Touchdown! End. Done. Over.

And no, I am not a Steelers fan. Far, far from it.

[MorseMoose]

What about the non-touchdown for the Vikings last week?

[Cobra Mgr]

I personally thought today's call was worse. Thielen was falling down & hit the ground OB before demonstrating control.

Jesse James caught it, landed 2 feet & a knee & then lunged w/the ball. Demonstrating control. I had always thought it was explained that you had to catch it, land & then make a "football move". James executed all three. The 2nd point I have is I saw no conclusive evidence the ball ever hit the ground. So regardless of control or not, I don't see any evidence where it could be overturned.

[ForeverRoyalKC]

MorseMoose, I didnt see the Vikings game, so I am unaware of what you are talking about. I quit the NFL a few years ago, but will occasionally peek in to see what's happening. Same cr*p, different day, it seems.

The whole endzone thing, to me, is like if a runner wins a marathon and he crosses the ribbon/finish line. Sometimes, a runner will finish a marathon and then take a knee or lay on their back from being tired or catching their breath, etc. If the NFL had a runner's marathon, they would have a rule that you have to cross the finish line AND stay on your feet or you didn't actually finish. If you cross it and take a knee or lay down, you didn't "finish" the finish. Kind of a weird way to put it, I guess, but I believe you all will get the point.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoyalKC

MorseMoose, I didnt see the Vikings game, so I am unaware of what you are talking about. I quit the NFL a few years ago, but will occasionally peek in to see what's happening. Same cr*p, different day, it seems.

The whole endzone thing, to me, is like if a runner wins a marathon and he crosses the ribbon/finish line. Sometimes, a runner will finish a marathon and then take a knee or lay on their back from being tired or catching their breath, etc. If the NFL had a runner's marathon, they would have a rule that you have to cross the finish line AND stay on your feet or you didn't actually finish. If you cross it and take a knee or lay down, you didn't "finish" the finish. Kind of a weird way to put it, I guess, but I believe you all will get the point.

The difference between crossing the finish line in a race and crossing the goal line in football is that in a race you don't need to be in control of anything but your body. In football you need to be in control of the football, which means you can cross the line without being in control of the ball. So, you do need to finish the finish in football.

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

I personally thought today's call was worse. Thielen was falling down & hit the ground OB before demonstrating control.

Jesse James caught it, landed 2 feet & a knee & then lunged w/the ball. Demonstrating control. I had always thought it was explained that you had to catch it, land & then make a "football move". James executed all three. The 2nd point I have is I saw no conclusive evidence the ball ever hit the ground. So regardless of control or not, I don't see any evidence where it could be overturned.

I think what's being argued with the James catch is that he did not make a "move." The only potential "move" he may have made was stretching his arms out to cross the goal line. Beyond that his body only did what a body does when diving for a catch. Since it was not deemed that he made a move he needed to complete the catch without losing the ball. By hitting the ball on the ground (which can be clearly seen with a right view) and losing control of the ball he did not complete the catch. So it all comes down to whether stretching his arms out is considered a "move."

[Bluenoser]

NFL makes up the rules as they go along. Just when you think you've seen it all, they start using index cards to measure for 1st downs.

http://www.nfl.com/m/share?p=%2Fvide...st-down-marker

[MorseMoose]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

I personally thought today's call was worse. Thielen was falling down & hit the ground OB before demonstrating control.

Jesse James caught it, landed 2 feet & a knee & then lunged w/the ball. Demonstrating control. I had always thought it was explained that you had to catch it, land & then make a "football move". James executed all three. The 2nd point I have is I saw no conclusive evidence the ball ever hit the ground. So regardless of control or not, I don't see any evidence where it could be overturned.

I don't think either are touchdowns. But it goes to show that even if there is consistency (as you're trying to show), there is going to be disagreement.

[TribeFanInNC]

Yeah, Steelers got completely hosed. That was a horrible call. I don't even think a Patriots fan can defend that. NFL outsmarts itself again.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

I think what's being argued with the James catch is that he did not make a "move." The only potential "move" he may have made was stretching his arms out to cross the goal line. Beyond that his body only did what a body does when diving for a catch. Since it was not deemed that he made a move he needed to complete the catch without losing the ball. By hitting the ball on the ground (which can be clearly seen with a right view) and losing control of the ball he did not complete the catch. So it all comes down to whether stretching his arms out is considered a "move."

If that is the argument, it is a poor one. The guy clearly made a move to cross the plane. Diving for the end zone is the ultimate "football move". Where else in life would someone lunge to "break the plane" but in football?

And something else that came into my mind last night......If the Pats defender managed to tag him before he broke the plane, with James' knee on the ground, would that have been considered a tackle at that point? Or would he have still needed to "complete the process" across the goal line? If so, and the ball never budged, would it have then been a TD because he the play wasn't over until he landed in the end zone?

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

If that is the argument, it is a poor one. The guy clearly made a move to cross the plane. Diving for the end zone is the ultimate "football move". Where else in life would someone lunge to "break the plane" but in football?

And something else that came into my mind last night......If the Pats defender managed to tag him before he broke the plane, with James' knee on the ground, would that have been considered a tackle at that point? Or would he have still needed to "complete the process" across the goal line? If so, and the ball never budged, would it have then been a TD because he the play wasn't over until he landed in the end zone?

He didn't dive for the endzone though. He dove for the ball. As he was falling while diving for the ball he reached his hands out to try and break the plane. When he reached out and the ball hit the ground it popped loose in his grip. Had that happened anywhere other than the endzone it would have been, without question, an incomplete pass. The reason this is being argued is because it did happen in the endzone.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

He didn't dive for the endzone though. He dove for the ball. As he was falling while diving for the ball he reached his hands out to try and break the plane. When he reached out and the ball hit the ground it popped loose in his grip. Had that happened anywhere other than the endzone it would have been, without question, an incomplete pass. The reason this is being argued is because it did happen in the endzone.

Uhhhhh..........Did you see the play?

[ohiodevil]

He clearly is what the NFL calls "going to the ground"

https://twitter.com/Benstonium/statu...2016-112426756

And (right or wrong) here is the rule in the NFL rule book about what a catch is:

Item 1. Player Going to the Ground. A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

Item 4. Ball Touches Ground. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control of it, it is a catch, provided that the player continues to maintain control.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Uhhhhh..........Did you see the play?

Yes. Live. And in replay over and over and over and over during the game. As well, multiple times today in various formats. And I thought it was a catch until the replays focused on him bobbling the ball because of contact with the ground. He clearly loses control of the ball at about 0:04 once it hits the ground. Thus an incomplete pass. Yes, the ball broke the plane, he didn't complete the pass so it doesn't matter.

If he did that exact thing simply going for a first down, he would not get a first down. It would be ruled incomplete.

[MorseMoose]

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by MorseMoose

Correct

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

Yes. Live. And in replay over and over and over and over during the game. As well, multiple times today in various formats. And I thought it was a catch until the replays focused on him bobbling the ball because of contact with the ground. He clearly loses control of the ball at about 0:04 once it hits the ground. Thus an incomplete pass. Yes, the ball broke the plane, he didn't complete the pass so it doesn't matter.

If he did that exact thing simply going for a first down, he would not get a first down. It would be ruled incomplete.

How in the world can you say he was "diving for the ball" if you saw the play?

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by ohiodevil

He clearly is what the NFL calls "going to the ground"

https://twitter.com/Benstonium/statu...2016-112426756

And (right or wrong) here is the rule in the NFL rule book about what a catch is:

There is (at least should be) a diff between going to the ground like Thelien/Dez & diving to cross the plane. James made a conscious attempt to advance the ball after catching the ball. That is control. Whether the NFL rulebook wants to acknowledge it or not. At some point, common sense has to be allowed for.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

How in the world can you say he was "diving for the ball" if you saw the play?

Because he dove for the ball. After diving for the ball he stretched out his arms to cross the plane with the ball. And then he bobbled the ball once it hit the ground which made the pass incomplete. That's the rule whether you like it or not. The refs just followed the rule, whether its a good rule or not.

Would that have been a complete pass had he not been attempting to cross the goal line? No.

[MorseMoose]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

There is (at least should be) a diff between going to the ground like Thelien/Dez & diving to cross the plane. James made a conscious attempt to advance the ball after catching the ball. That is control. Whether the NFL rulebook wants to acknowledge it or not. At some point, common sense has to be allowed for.

What if, in that conscious effort of extending the ball forward, a defensive player had swatted the ball out? Would that have then been a fumble?

[TGH-Adfabre]

Originally Posted by MorseMoose

What if, in that conscious effort of extending the ball forward, a defensive player had swatted the ball out? Would that have then been a fumble?

Doubtful, defenders have been separating receiver from the ball for years. They would rule he did not make a "football move" and establish himself as a runner.