Nope, the Pats won.
I don’t have any idea what a catch or a touchdown are anymore.
He didn’t maintain control all the way through the act of catching the ball. Tough call, to be sure, but it is consistent.
I can’t believe we allowed them to intercept it! Just…ugh!
Hey Tomlin - you might want to put an extra guy on #87. Oh - it also helps to use the NFL’s leading rusher in the last few minutes when you need a couple first downs to ice the game.
Just trying to help… 
He had a hand underneath it. At no time in the replay did I see the ball hit the ground.
It’s a brutal way to lose, but that is absolutely not a catch. That gets reversed on review 100% of the time.
That ball absolutely hit the ground while it was against the back of his left hand. It’s Dez Bryant all over again, the only question was whether they’d call it at Heinz.
Yes, the ball definitely hits the ground. I don’t like the rule. I didn’t like it when it went in the Bears’ favor (my team) with Calvin Johnson; I didn’t like it with Bryant; I don’t like it here. But it is consistent, I suppose. But I feel like he had control of it (like Bryant) before he made a football move (lunging towards the endzone). shrug
Oh yeah, agree - the rule sucks. If they just modified it to allow for possession while breaking the plane, while requiring possession when completing to the ground when not in the endzone, the rule would at least feel consistent.
That call was bullshit. Every catch looks like a bobble if you slow it down enough. He had the ball and made a move and broke the plane.
Did JuJu celebrate a TD by mocking the hit/taunting of Vontaze Burfict? Did I see that right?
Yup, he is turning into a true Steeler.
According to the rule (at least how it’s been explained over and over again) you need to “survive the ground” no matter what. Football move and breaking the plane don’t matter if you don’t maintain full control all the way to the ground. I’m not particularly fond of the rule, but until it is changed all players should know it and act accordingly.
It would have been a touchdown if he hadn’t gone to the ground. If he had simply caught the ball and broke the plane and stayed on his feet, the catch rule wouldn’t even be coming into play here. By going to the ground, he risked allowing the rule to come in and rear its ugly head.
Right, the fact that he’s near/in the end zone has nothing to do with the ruling about whether it’s a catch or not.
I’d prefer that the rule for a catch just be control of the ball, with two feet or another body part on the ground. Basically the same as the rule for a catch along the sidelines, as far as determining in or out of bounds. But you end up with weird plays that way too; it’s not like they came up with the current catch rule out of nowhere for no reason at all.
Of course, this call will also overshadow whatever the heck happened on that last play, where Roethlisberger signaled a fake spike, then not, then blamed the coaches it sounded like, then maybe blamed himself?
Hopefully there’s a rematch of this game.
Once Roethlisberger realized that he hadn’t caught the Patriots off-guard, and that his receiver was double-covered in the end zone, he should have just thrown the ball into the stands. Take the field goal on 4th down. Instead he tried to be the hero and shove the ball into a very tight window.
Roethlisberger also already has a reputation for trying the fake-spike antic, so it’s not like teams can’t see it coming.
It’s also pretty obvious when you’re running up to the line doing the spike motion, and then you start calling out an audible as soon as you get there.
How does that *ever *work, except for that first time by Marino? The D just has to set up, and if it’s a spike, so what. Just throw it to whoever looks openest. The fake spike works about as often as the long count on fourth and short trying to make the D jump.
The new catch rule is bogus, yes, but the play was called per the rule.