Let's talk about Harris's catch.

[BigRedChief]

We have visual evidence he had control of the ball with two feet down.

If someone leans forward and puts the ball across the goal line, then gets it batted away by the defense before he's down, its still a TD.

Reid says he didn't think it was a catch, so he didn't challenge. Why not challenge anyway. Sometimes you get the call when you didn't think you had a chance.

The only way I can see thats not a catch is that stupid rule of controlling the ball when going to the ground.

I havent heard from anyone who knows the rules inside and out. Was this a case of not controlling the ball when going to the ground?

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

That play wouldn't get overturned seeing it again that gif. That being said I have no idea why possession of the ball in the EZ isn't immediately a TD.

Once he had both hands on the ball and both feet down, TD. But thats not how they call it now sans the Megatron play which was a TD as well that they called incomplete.

This:

Originally Posted by staylor26

I think the reason why some people aren’t seeing a catch is because of the many times we’ve seen a defender go to the ground and lose the ball. This is a different story as Harris never went to the ground. He completed the catch and had two feet down, then the defender yanked it out.

That’s a TD.

[l4z4rd]

Originally Posted by Cochise

I do not think it was a catch, in terms of completing the process. It was just a drop.

I also find it interesting that no one else, the announcers or anyone thought it worthy of a challenge, and there hasn't been any discussion in the media that I have seen about it being a questionable call, so I think this is most non-Chief fans' view on it.

Romo thought it was a catch during the broadcast after watching the replay

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Originally Posted by Warrick

PGM's true colors are shining through... this isn't about Alex you meathead... it's about the play at hand.

Not at all. Just giving a bit of reality to the situation. It was a team loss.

[Warrick]

There was no second act to the play... he had both hands on the ball.

[dj56dt58]

In any case, Andy should have challenged. At least try to make up for your dumbass decision to go for it

[Shag]

That should definitely be a TD, unless you want to argue that Harris lost control before the second foot hit (which doesn't appear to be the case to my eyes). It's the equivalent of jumping for an uncontested catch, landing in the endzone, then having someone swat the ball out of your hands - that's a TD every time.

Can't fathom what reasoning went into not challenging.

[FloridaMan88]

Harris is beyond terrible.

He can't catch.

He can't block.

[PutQuinnIn]

"This one's on me" Reid needs his red hankies taken away from him. Not challenging is basically not using an extra down. You never know what a review official might interpret-just look what happened to the Jets.

[l4z4rd]

I'm surprised that Harris didn't plead with Reid to challenge the ruling.

[lawrenceRaider]

Originally Posted by Shag

That should definitely be a TD, unless you want to argue that Harris lost control before the second foot hit (which doesn't appear to be the case to my eyes). It's the equivalent of jumping for an uncontested catch, landing in the endzone, then having someone swat the ball out of your hands - that's a TD every time.

Can't fathom what reasoning went into not challenging.

I thought he had lost control of the ball, at least it was moving to my eyes, before his second foot came down.

That said, the Chiefs are among the NFL's red headed step children and never get those calls to go their way.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by staylor26

Harris had two hand around the ball and control with two feet down. I think that objectively had a good shot at being overturned.

not if that go to the ground and maintain possession rule is applicable.

[jspchief]

Looked like an incomplete pass to me.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by O.city

Once you gain control of the ball, haven't you completed the act of the catch?

No. The rule has morphed a bit over time, and there are different phrases used -- "football move", "survive the ground", etc. But in reality, no, you it's something MORE than two feet and possession. You have to maintain control for a bit longer.

Not saying it's good or bad. Just saying that's what it is.

[Marcellus]

All you need to know about how that challenge woudl have went is to look at the Jets TD getting taken off that board.

If he didn't have possession, no way did Harris.

You have to ask why not run Kelce on that route and have Harris split wide. Kelce has much better hands and burst. Much better chance of him coming down with that football.

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by O.city

Once you gain control of the ball, haven't you completed the act of the catch?

No.

If you are falling to the ground and the ball gets knocked out, then it is incomplete.

If you come down with both feet (in the middle of the field), with control, but the defender knocks the ball out before you can make a "football move" it is not a catch and fumble.