Greatest catch in NFL history
I didn't actually watch the game
But based on this evidence. I can 100% conclude that this is indeed NOT a catch. he didn't have complete control of the ball (you can see in the bobble at 1 second in). He had his right foot down, but his left clearly steps out of bounds. You can try to argue with this but you would be wrong.
>SHOULD BE ASS OR SOMETHING DESU
>Implying it's not a play on buttfumble
Well apparently you know more than every single ref and sports analyst
YOU FUCKING LOST. GTFO.
yeah...never really understood why the league fucked him so hard.
Usually they encourage the "all stars" to make star plays. But I guess its more about what team you play on these days.
It was literally raining and his gloves are soaked. If you played football you would understand how dificult it is to catch a ball with wet gloves.
Shut your mouth and witness greatness
theres no way this was a catch. foot down,bobbling foot down, ball behind knee. even if you want to say. he then cluthces it to his leg now while its behind his knee he only gets one foot down after that before he flips out of bounds and holds the ball in his stomach. in my eyes, that should count as him juggling it until he lands anyway and he clearly lands out of bounds. but even if you disagree with that he only has one foot down when he stops juggling
i disagree because only catches that come in the clutch can contend for greatest catch in NFL history. It's the same reason why I don't think OBJs catches are all that amazing. yeah they deserve style points but it came in the regular season..
as far martavis bryants catch no doubt it was an amazing catch that deserves many style points but it's in the wild card round so it can't compete with the helmet catch or even the steelers catch against the cards in the owl
>NFL establishes retarded, obsessive legal catch rules
>rules with an iron fist and allows no questioning
>Point out how this catch isn't legal following NFL's standards
>people complain that we're the obsessive ones
Look how many of you faggots drank the NFL coolaid. They ruined your favorite sport and made you believe someone else is to blame.
You got the feet backwards but I agree.
If it had been called incomplete originally that call would also have stood after review. Very hard to tell when he actually gets possesion
The bobble occurs when his 1st foot is down, he then regains control with the same foot down and he gets the 2nd foot down with control, he then maintains control all the way to the ground.
According to the rules that's a catch, if you disagree, you don't understand the rules
Are you illiterate or what? You guys keep going on about the rules, be we agree on the rule. What we don't agree on is the clear FACT that the ball is still moving after he lifts up his first foot. Hell, he secures it in his bent knee, initially (the knee is bent as he lifts his foot)
I mean, no rule book will cure you from your fanboy blindness.
The bobble occurs at the beginning, you can see him adjusting the ball to get a better grip on it and then establishing both feet inbounds. After that he has it pinned to his leg, which is not a bobble.
Don't think it was a catch. It definitely should be, but it looks like he gets it with one foot down, bobbles it, then regains it and the other foot comes down. Don't know how they called it a catch under their current BS rules
Jesus, even if it was catch (which I don't even think it was), how the fuck is that impressive? When I heard he used his butt to catch it I thought the ball hit him in his butt and he caught it like that. What he actually did was make the least graceful and retarded looking catch I've ever seen when he could have caught it normally.
>greatest of all time
Yea sure, stoolerfags.
So a ball moving while being pinned to a guy's forearm is not being in control but if it is moving while pinned to a guy's ass in an awkward position it's not a bobble? If I was a cowboys fan I'd be livid.
I don't think you're trolling. I'm shocked that you're not. And I think you're both (you and the replay officials) just wrong. That happens.
I mean, the ball is definitely moving until he secures it in the crack of his knee. He's only able to do that because his knee is bent and his foot is off the ground. That's just clear fact, and you can't tell me a single thing about that description that is inaccurate.
I honestly wouldn't mind the results of any of this if the NFL would just straight up come out and say that they got the call wrong.
This literally goes against everything they've said in regards to rules and use of replay.
It's not a catch and you can't argue it's a catch unless ignore the fact that the player never has control until he's out of bounds.
Technically the ball was moving around and he didn't really secure it until one leg was out of bounds.
Mind you I think it's a catch 100% of the time but I've seen refs call things like this incomplete and people defend it, wish there was some consistency with refs in this shit league
m8, if you think he didn't secure it until one foot was out of bounds, how can you say you think it's a catch?
the only way you could hold those two thoughts is to not know the rules
Listen up faggots. To prove possession and show you have complete control of the ball you have have the ball pressed against you securely during the entire catch with at least one hand. The reason this is such a great catch is because he was able to keep the ball secure against his body through the full duration of the catch despite catching the ball at such an awkward angle.
Of course you whiny faggots would be arguing about whether or not it was a catch.
1. He had possession (even though the ball was moving AROUND HIS BODY)
2. He maintained possession as he went out of bounds.
It was a catch... it always WILL BE a catch... and every ref, sports figure, and analyst agrees.
Stay mad, faggots.
The ball can move around without the receiver losing control of the ball. Bryant's hand remained on the ball and had control of it against his leg through his final two steps. By definition it was a reception.
I think it's a catch in that the rules are retarded, it is definitely not a catch within the current rules and I've seen them call incomplete on balls that didn't move around as much as this one
the ball was clearly bobbling before he went out of bounds... he also had to do a bullshit flip to distract the refs that he didn't have possession all the way through. Also big ben fumbled on the burfict sack but the shit got swept under the rug of course
He has to trap the ball with his right leg, which never comes back down in bounds after he secures the ball, assuming you forgive moving it across his body to his other hand.
I've seen much better "catches" called incomplete this year. Shit's wack, yo.
I have a stupid question, would anyone notice if i put glue on my gloves?
Goddamn it stop that. It was visually stunning but it only happened because he completely failed the easy textbook grab that was the original pass.
Going above and beyond to catch a poorly thrown ball: great catch. Doing gymnastics to correct your own damn mistake: the opposite
I'll fucking kill you do you understand me? Think you're so god damn smug posting behind a computer? But you wouldn't say that shit irl at the stadium because you'd get fucked up worse than pussy ass Antonio Brown, you hear me? They'd have to give the fans a personal fowl for what we'd fucking do to you you piece of god damn trash
did he drop the ball?
did he lose the ball?
No. Because he maintained control of the ball.
Jesus fuck you bengals fags are so fucking sad that you couldn't win even when getting away with playing murderball all season long.
If Burfict and Pacman were a rival team in your division you would think that they deserve the electric chair
That's a hard one to tell. It looks like the ball bounces at about the 3 second mark between his hand and his leg after his right leg leaves the ground for the last time. His left leg is down once he has control but his right never touches the ground, inbounds again.