Al Michaels and Chris Collinsworth both seemed sure that the call should have been overturned.
I agreed. He established two feet down but then the ball moved - once he regained possession with one foot still down, the second foot looked to be on the endline.
Is bobbling/shifting of ball a different type of losing possession, or is this only instances when the ground causes the loss of possession/ball movement?
What did everyone think?
Thought the final catch by Ertz was good, going in as a runner.
Final thought: everyone seem to say they can't wait until they change the rule to something better. What exactly does that mean? Whatever they change it to, you'll have a new population of plays that will make it hard to interpret - particularly when instant replay is involved breaking down to frame by frame.
If you moved a ball from one arm to the other at high speed, being punched or tackled, there might be a moment when the ball wasn't tucked tight to your stomach but it is still under your control.
The Nick Foles TD reception was illegal formation.
And they set a pick on that key Ertz reception on the last drive.
There's no doubt (at least in my mind) that those three plays changed the outcome of the game.
I heard today on the Foles play Jeffrey was close enough to the line and motioned to the ref when he lined up to get the ok he was in a proper position and not too far off the line.
However Bart Scott said Foles should've been called for illegal procedure on the play.
He's allowed as a QB to move forward from the shotgun so he can be heard to change the play, or give instructions to his line but when he didn't return to his QB position he should've been flagged like anyone else who moves forward on a play. Not sure if that's true or there's a loophole there but he sounded like he was certain of the rule there.
If you moved a ball from one arm to the other at high speed, being punched or tackled, there might be a moment when the ball wasn't tucked tight to your stomach but it is still under your control.
Problem is he was going to the ground so it makes it one of those murky calls once the ball moves.
If they were being consistent with how they called that play all year, it should've been overturned and ruled incomplete.
Like I said earlier, look no further than the Benjamin TD play vs the Pats. Pretty much the same exact play. It was ruled a TD on the field but overturned on review.
Quote:
he was most definitely a runner by the time he got to the goal line. that one shouldn't have even been in doubt.
Definitely, but so was Jesse James TD against NE that was called back.
The whole "going to the ground" thing flies in the face of all common sense.
James did not take 4 steps with the ball secured in hands before falling into the end zone. He also didnt clearly break the plane while taking steps 3 and 4.
I hate the Pats and I despise the Eagles so i got fucked on both calls - but both were right under the current system, and not remotely similar plays.
Quote:
In comment 13822671 LG in NYC said:
Quote:
he was most definitely a runner by the time he got to the goal line. that one shouldn't have even been in doubt.
Definitely, but so was Jesse James TD against NE that was called back.
The whole "going to the ground" thing flies in the face of all common sense.
James did not take 4 steps with the ball secured in hands before falling into the end zone. He also didnt clearly break the plane while taking steps 3 and 4.
I hate the Pats and I despise the Eagles so i got fucked on both calls - but both were right under the current system, and not remotely similar plays.
Collinsworth was clearly using that play as the basis for questioning whether it was a TD or not so I don’t think think they are all that different.
I agree with you that it was a clear TD. But my argument is that the NFL knowingly created this inconsistency
Quote:
The Clemons TD should have been over turned.
The Nick Foles TD reception was illegal formation.
And they set a pick on that key Ertz reception on the last drive.
There's no doubt (at least in my mind) that those three plays changed the outcome of the game.
I heard today on the Foles play Jeffrey was close enough to the line and motioned to the ref when he lined up to get the ok he was in a proper position and not too far off the line.
However Bart Scott said Foles should've been called for illegal procedure on the play.
He's allowed as a QB to move forward from the shotgun so he can be heard to change the play, or give instructions to his line but when he didn't return to his QB position he should've been flagged like anyone else who moves forward on a play. Not sure if that's true or there's a loophole there but he sounded like he was certain of the rule there.
There's a picture of the play where it clearly shows illegal formation, I'll try to find it.
The illegal procedure call also makes sense.
If you moved a ball from one arm to the other at high speed, being punched or tackled, there might be a moment when the ball wasn't tucked tight to your stomach but it is still under your control.
He did not purposely move the ball from one hand to the other. It was bobbling, almost dropped and he had to reach for it and then it slid down his left side to his hip, where half the ball was hanging out behind his arm. If you consider that as being secure at that point, he had already place his left foot out of bounds. It was clearly not a completed pass in this or any set of rules.
Ertz's was a catch, I was wrong on my initial thoughts on the play. He caught it, ran about 5 yards and crossed the plain and it popped out. But it was already a TD.
Quote:
In comment 13822787 Peppers said:
Quote:
The Clemons TD should have been over turned.
The Nick Foles TD reception was illegal formation.
And they set a pick on that key Ertz reception on the last drive.
There's no doubt (at least in my mind) that those three plays changed the outcome of the game.
I heard today on the Foles play Jeffrey was close enough to the line and motioned to the ref when he lined up to get the ok he was in a proper position and not too far off the line.
However Bart Scott said Foles should've been called for illegal procedure on the play.
He's allowed as a QB to move forward from the shotgun so he can be heard to change the play, or give instructions to his line but when he didn't return to his QB position he should've been flagged like anyone else who moves forward on a play. Not sure if that's true or there's a loophole there but he sounded like he was certain of the rule there.
There's a picture of the play where it clearly shows illegal formation, I'll try to find it.
The illegal procedure call also makes sense.
Nah man, no need. I've seen it. The reports today pretty much said he was close enough and if he was flagged for that, they could flag it on most plays during the season.
Plus he was seen looking to the linesman and motioning to him like receivers do when lining up outside. I could see it being called but can also see why it wasn't. If the linesman there told him he was ok, there's not much to it after that.
What the hell else do you need to be doing for 5 yards to have possession?
He caught the ball between the 5 and 6 yard lines, ran 2 steps (in NFL rule terms, established himself as a runner), leaped, and the ball crossed the plane of the end zone.
At this point, it is by definition a touchdown.
What happened afterward, ball gets loose whatever, is irrelevant. It was already a touchdown.
Not how the rule has been interpreted over the last few years. Again, I say it's clearly not a catch.
Also, as far as letting stuff go and not calling penalties and such, Goodell has gone on record as saying call it in SB the same way you'd call it in Game 1. So he says.
The difference is clear to me.
See the JJames replay here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63VVS-Iqmmk
Not how the rule has been interpreted over the last few years. Again, I say it's clearly not a catch.
Also, as far as letting stuff go and not calling penalties and such, Goodell has gone on record as saying call it in SB the same way you'd call it in Game 1. So he says.
Main point of my brief thread last night - regardless of whether you like it, Steratore and his crew called the Super Bowl differently than any other game was officiated all season: no offensive holding, for example.
The Clement TD was not a TD based on movement of the ball and his foot - that's the way it was called all year.
Keith : 2/5/2018 4:29 pm : link : reply
In what world was that a catch compared to what we saw all season long. The Ertz TD is in a similar boat. I understand why its a TD, but no consistency with how they've called plays like that all season long. The Clement "TD" was mind boggling to me. Did they miss the ball moving in his arm?
The Bills thought for sure Kelvin Benjamin had a TD against the Pats. It was overturned with less evidence than the Clement TD.
Greg Olsen had a similar call go against him. Back of the end zone, ball is being repositioned in the arm, only one foot down. Golden Tate had a similar call. There's probably a few more to look at as well.
Collinsworth said that's a play that has been overturned all year long, and I agree. But there was a different standard applied yesterday. It is strange that people have wanted the interpretation to be used all year long and it wasn't. Then, on the biggest stage it is.
Just inconsistency. All we needed Sunday was a dual possession play that was correctly called a interception.
Conversely, for the life of me, I cannot understand the uproar over the clear as day Ertz touchdown. Frankly, it took them too long to review - but i guess given the stakes of the game at that point they took a little extra time. NBD. As Greg explains above, its not remotely the same situation as the James catch, unfortunately.
Not close to the Dez drop. Dez took 1 maybe 2 steps falling to the ground, clearly never a runner. See 1:15 mark of video.
Dez drop - ( New Window )