Jets get screwed on TD call. Overturned to a touchback.

[Hammock Parties]

League trying to set up that Chiefs-Pats matchup in the postseason, amirite BlackBob?

Ruled a TD on play



"Indisputable evidence" that it was a touchback.

[Pablo]

That was disgusting.

Give the Pats all the help they can, they absolutely need it this year. Trash team.

Every couple of years or so you get another team that rises up as a half-ass challenger in that JV league they call the AFCE and that just isn't acceptable. Gotta stamp that shit out so Tom Terrific has a nice, easy path.

[Donger]

Looks like he lost possession as he crossed the plane, and then re-gained possession?

[Easy 6]

Originally Posted by Donger

Looks like he lost possession as he crossed the plane, and then re-gained possession?

It was bobbled, but he had it under control before hitting the pylon

[Imon Yourside]

Originally Posted by Easy 6

It was bobbled, but he had it under control before hitting the pylon

Correct, there is zero evidence of anything else to overturn it.

[TribalElder]

How much did that call impact the betting lines

[Nzoner]

Originally Posted by TribalElder

How much did that call impact the betting lines

It really depends on when you bet because the line was Pats -9.5 and closed at 9 and the Over/Under opened at 47 and closed at 48.5

Basically if you had the spread and the O/U at 47 you were happy as hell to see that call made in "hopes" that the pats would go and score.As it worked out that didn't happen but it at least made for entertaining tv.

[RealSNR]

I posted this in the other games thread:

So is the NFL going to redefine what is or is not a catch? For the 11,000th time?

I know one thing-- however they have the rule drawn up, there is inconsistency in administering it in games. "Control through the process of the catch" is the biggest sticky wicket. They should just ****ing get rid of that term. Go back to "football move" language if you have to. As undefined as that language is, at least it's interpretable. "Control through the process" is not, as has been shown multiple times per season since that language was put in to define a catch.

[GoChargers]

Just funny how Patriots fans earnestly believe that the league is biased against them. I wonder what it's like to be that delusional. I'd say they need a few decades without a playoff appearance to set them straight, but 99.99999% of their "fans" would simply move to the next bandwagon at that point.

[carlos3652]

Was the right call, wr fumbled the ball, and he did not regain possession until he was already out of bounds... ball went out of the end zone.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by carlos3652

Was the right call, wr fumbled the ball, and he did not regain possession until he was already out of bounds... ball went out of the end zone.

If it's the right call, the rule needs to be changed.

[carlos3652]

Originally Posted by DaFace

If it's the right call, the rule needs to be changed.

What rule? Where the ball is fumbled into the end zone?

[jjchieffan]

I don't understand how it was a touchback. Whether he temporarily lost control or not, he regained control. How is it a touchback? He didn't fumble.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by jjchieffan

I don't understand how it was a touchback. Whether he temporarily lost control or not, he regained control. How is it a touchback? He didn't fumble.

So it's a crap rule. If an offensive player fumbles INTO or THROUGH the end zone, then the ball is awarded to the DEFENSE (even though they didn't recover it) and it's a touchback at the 20. I think the call here was correct, but agree it's a crap rule. If the defense doesn't recover it in the end zone, then I think the offense shoudl get the ball at the one.


To avoid all doubt -- the ruling here is that the player lost control of the ball before he entered the end zone (which he clearly did) and did not regain control of the ball until AFTER the ball had crossed the plane, and therefore ball goes to the defense on a touchback.

Again, it helped the Pats today, but it's a crap rule.

[Dartgod]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

So it's a crap rule. If an offensive player fumbles INTO or THROUGH the end zone, then the ball is awarded to the DEFENSE (even though they didn't recover it) and it's a touchback at the 20. I think the call here was correct, but agree it's a crap rule. If the defense doesn't recover it in the end zone, then I think the offense shoudl get the ball at the one.


To avoid all doubt -- the ruling here is that the player lost control of the ball before he entered the end zone (which he clearly did) and did not regain control of the ball until AFTER the ball had crossed the plane, and therefore ball goes to the defense on a touchback.

Again, it helped the Pats today, but it's a crap rule.

Of course you do.