The Patriots are the luckiest SOBs in the NFL....

[droner]

Good yes. But really lucky.

[Tnphil]

What the hell is a catch? Pitt player catches the ball...ball breaks the plane of the goal line...but no catch!!! But still.....big Ben goes full tard and throws in the middle for a Int when they could have kicked and tied.

[BanditVol]

Well the Steelers likely get a chance for revenge in the playoffs.

Still...could have dealt NE a huge blow today, and let them slip away. 

[LouisVOL]

Dumbest rule ever.  Unquestioned possession and control, ball clearly crosses the plane, it's a touchdown, idiots!  The cynic in me says that if the teams were reversed, it would have been called a touchdown.  Stupid, stupid rule.  Fix it, NFL!

Good yes. But really lucky.

[Tnphil]

Dumbest rule ever.  Unquestioned possession and control, ball clearly crosses the plane, it's a touchdown, idiots!  The cynic in me says that if the teams were reversed, it would have been called a touchdown.  Stupid, stupid rule.  Fix it, NFL!

I read a good statement this morning.....If that had been a running back and the ball just touched the plane of the goal line and then fumbled, it would have been a TD.

[BanditVol]

I don't have NFL Gameday package, or whatever it's called, and the game was not shown on local TV in my area, so I had to go watch the replay online.  Truly an unbelievable fizzleing of the Steelers, and I don't even like them.

The tinkering with the "what is a pass" rule over the years has resulted in a godawful monstrosity.  Fans, players, and every single talking head in every single game where it has been a topic that I have watched for the last 5 years simply hate it.

The NFL needs to simplify it, period, dot.  I'd rather the refs be subjective about something simple than to have to go ten lines into a rule that could pass for Congressional legislation.   If they want rules this complicated and stupid they should require referees to have a law degree.   

[Coupe De VOL]

Dumbest rule ever.  Unquestioned possession and control, ball clearly crosses the plane, it's a touchdown, idiots!  The cynic in me says that if the teams were reversed, it would have been called a touchdown.  Stupid, stupid rule.  Fix it, NFL!

I agree with your sentiments, but I don't think it is an easy rule to fix.  It's a pretty good rule 99.9% of the time when you have a rcvr making a catch while falling down.  In this case, the rcvr was technically in the process of falling down, but he exhibited enough control to twist his body and extend to the goal line.  You don't want the rcvr to use the ground to help him make the catch, and that is the purpose of the rule.  Clearly the ground was not used to facilitate the catch in this case, but it did not measure up to the "objective" catch defn set in the rule book.  I'm all for making the rules as objective as possible, but sometimes that burns you.

[LouisVOL]

But it is not objective.  Whether the ground aided in the catch is a subjective judgment.  I would much rather see a subjective judgment on clear and complete control, particularly in the case where breaking the plane ends the play in every other situation.  You are right, it is not an easy rule to fix, but breaking the plane is a historical standard.

I agree with your sentiments, but I don't think it is an easy rule to fix.  It's a pretty good rule 99.9% of the time when you have a rcvr making a catch while falling down.  In this case, the rcvr was technically in the process of falling down, but he exhibited enough control to twist his body and extend to the goal line.  You don't want the rcvr to use the ground to help him make the catch, and that is the purpose of the rule.  Clearly the ground was not used to facilitate the catch in this case, but it did not measure up to the "objective" catch defn set in the rule book.  I'm all for making the rules as objective as possible, but sometimes that burns you.

[BanditVol]

I don't think the rule will ever be truly objective.  The attempt to make it so has merely made it more complicated.

Or put another way, it's a major fail.

[Coupe De VOL]

I think it is as objective as you can get - if it hits the ground and you lose control of it - no catch.  The only subjective part is the "lose control" part of it and that is rarely controversial.  Bandit, you are flipping crazy - just because it fails once in a million incomplete calls - it is a major fail.....uhhh, right.  I'm not saying that call didn't suck, but you have to look at the other side of it before you throw the rule away.  Having the Refs make the judgement call on whether the ground helped the catch or not would be a fizzleing nightmare.  Right now it is pretty absolute - the ball moves outside of the players control - no catch.  Also, you have to keep in mind this only applies to cases where the catch is made while the rcvr is falling down AND the ball makes contact with the ground.  Maybe they can tweak it, but I think the best way is to come up with some kind of mechanism to override the rule at times.  But I don't think you can leave that responsibility up to one person on the crew.

[Tnphil]

The issue with me is that it wasn't a diving catch that the ball hit the ground in process of making the catch.....He caught the ball....tucked the ball....made a 'Football' move then dove for the goal line...the ball crossed the goal line and then the ball touched the ground as he went down after crossing the plane. If that had been a swing pass to a running back out of the backfield caught on the 10 and he ran and dove and the ball crosses the plane and hit the ground there is no way, IMO they don't call that a TD.

[BanditVol]

I think it is as objective as you can get - if it hits the ground and you lose control of it - no catch.  The only subjective part is the "lose control" part of it and that is rarely controversial.  Bandit, you are flipping crazy - just because it fails once in a million incomplete calls - it is a major fail.....uhhh, right.  I'm not saying that call didn't suck, but you have to look at the other side of it before you throw the rule away.  Having the Refs make the judgement call on whether the ground helped the catch or not would be a fizzleing nightmare.  Right now it is pretty absolute - the ball moves outside of the players control - no catch.  Also, you have to keep in mind this only applies to cases where the catch is made while the rcvr is falling down AND the ball makes contact with the ground.  Maybe they can tweak it, but I think the best way is to come up with some kind of mechanism to override the rule at times.  But I don't think you can leave that responsibility up to one person on the crew.

we don't appear to be talking about the same rule. Here it is in all it's glory.

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/completing-a-catch/

ARTICLE 3. COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS
A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:

secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
maintains control of the ball after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, until he has the ball long enough to clearly become a runner. A player has the ball long enough to become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps (see 3-2-7-Item 2).
Note: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.

If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch.

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 2. Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, or the pass is incomplete.

Item 3. End Zone Catches. The requirements for a catch in the end zone are the same as the requirements for a catch in the field of play.

Note: In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, after which contact by a defender causes the ball to become loose before the runner is down by contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goal line prior to the loss of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.

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.

Item 5. Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

Item 6. Carried Out of Bounds. If a player, who is in possession of the ball, is held up and carried out of bounds by an opponent before both feet or any part of his body other than his hands touches the ground inbounds, it is a completed or intercepted pass. It is not necessary for the player to maintain control of the ball when he lands out of bounds.

[BanditVol]

A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:

secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
maintains control of the ball after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, until he has the ball long enough to clearly become a runner. A player has the ball long enough to become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps (see 3-2-7-Item 2).
Note: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.

The part that is controversial, and has been condemned by every single talking head in every single NFL game I have watched in the last five years, is the bold part.  It's not "objective", it's completely fizzleing stupid.

  We can agree to disagree. But as my next post shows, you are in a very small minority.

[BanditVol]

"Complete history of the NFL's dumb pass catch rule confusing people"

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/11/20/9746130/nfl-catch-rule-controversies-calvin-johnson-referees

"NFL rewrites Dez Bryant rule and it might actually be more confusing"

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-rewrites-dez-bryant-rule-and-it-might-actually-be-more-confusing/

"How the NFL's catch rule became the worst rule in sports'

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2639506-how-the-nfls-catch-rule-became-the-worst-rule-in-sports

“I am just as lost as any fan or any player,” says Andrew Hawkins, the Browns’ 5-7 everyman wideout, who has played five NFL seasons. “There is no real definition. It just doesn’t make sense. You can’t quantify it.”

https://www.si.com/mmqb/2016/03/17/themmqb-catch-nfl-rulebook-dez-bryant-no-catch-larry-fitzgerald-golden-tate-tyler-eifert-odell

"I think I finally understand the catch rule, and it still sucks"

https://deadspin.com/i-think-i-finally-understand-the-catch-rule-and-it-sti-1821381923

It's easily the most complained about rule in sports. I can't think of anything even close to approaching it.

I guess I give the NFL an A for effort, but an F for the actual rule.

After watching the video again, one thing we definitely agree on is that it was a bad call.  I don't think the ground should have been relevant because the player clearly got two feet down, secured the ball, and (IMO) made a "football move" with the lunge towards the goal line.

i have seen simliar catches ruled catches over the years. 

But bottom line...objective or not, the rule is a mess, and I think 99.9% of the football world agrees with me.