LOL....its like some of the people posting believe that if they admit that they saw the ball still moving that the NFL is gonna suddenly change their minds and take the catch away or something...,  

---

LOL....its like some of the people posting believe that if they admit that they saw the ball still moving that the NFL is gonna suddenly change their minds and take the catch away or something...,  

Or they just disagree with you......  

---

LOL....its like some of the people posting believe that if they admit that they saw the ball still moving that the NFL is gonna suddenly change their minds and take the catch away or something...,  

 

Yeah. That has to be it.

---

LOL....its like some of the people posting believe that if they admit that they saw the ball still moving that the NFL is gonna suddenly change their minds and take the catch away or something...,  

 

LOL.....its like that one hater that says Cecil has cinder-block-hands and runs like a robot just has to find some way to validate his misguided criticism or something.....

   

---

LOL.....its like that one hater that says Cecil has cinder-block-hands and runs like a robot just has to find some way to validate his misguided criticism or something.....

   

 

Not only did the Jaguars win but Shorts had the winning catch. It was like TMD got shot and stabbed at the same time.

---

Not only did the Jaguars win but Shorts had the winning catch. It was like TMD got shot and stabbed at the same time.

 

Yeah, except I was right there cheering the ref decision and subsequent Jags win on at the time it happened, so.....ooops. You're wrong. 

 

I just feel after watching the replays that the ball was moving still and not fully secured. 

---

Yeah, except I was right there cheering the ref decision and subsequent Jags win on at the time it happened, so.....ooops. You're wrong. 

 

I just feel after watching the replays that the ball was moving still and not fully secured. 

 

And now you have the thread to prove it. Congrats.

---

The ball was moving, but it was in no way' unsecured'. It wasnt bobbling or bouncing around in his hands, but just being passed from one hold to another.

 

I belive its similar to the 'ball touching the ground' rule. If the ball touches the ground, it isnt immedietly a non-catch. If you demonstrate control of the ball, it can touch the ground.

 

That appears to be what happens in this call. You clearly see the ball move, but I couldnt see how anyone could define it as a bobble. From the time it hits shorts, he never loses control, he just adjsuts how he is holding it.

 

Very similar to gordons earlier TD, his ball was still moving also, but he kept control.

---

The ball was moving, but it was in no way' unsecured'. It wasnt bobbling or bouncing around in his hands, but just being passed from one hold to another.

 

I belive its similar to the 'ball touching the ground' rule. If the ball touches the ground, it isnt immedietly a non-catch. If you demonstrate control of the ball, it can touch the ground.

 

That appears to be what happens in this call. You clearly see the ball move, but I couldnt see how anyone could define it as a bobble. From the time it hits shorts, he never loses control, he just adjsuts how he is holding it.

 

Very similar to gordons earlier TD, his ball was still moving also, but he kept control.

Great explanation of what happened  ( to my eye.)   ^^

 

Well put.

---

They are 2 threads that I started. ANd I never used the phrase "the secondary sucks" at all. Those are your words. 

 

I notice you leave out MANY positive posts I have made in responses in other threads today. 

 

Typical. 

 

He had possession.  A ball can move within somebody's possession, which is different from "bobbling."  The latter means the player is still processing the catch with this body/hands, which Shorts was not doing -- he had the ball in his possession.

 

Sorry, chief.  It was a catch.

---

My definition of a bobble would be a player's hands loosing contact with the ball after the "catch".

 

That never happened in this case. I think it was a good call.

---

I thought he had possession and was a legit catch, but it would be called back anyway.

---

He had possession + 2 feet in the endzone = TD. 

 

It really is that simple. 

---

Looks to me like the ball is securely in his hands and his hands are moving back and forth giving the illusion that the ball is not secure. 

 

Therefore....

 

Catch confirmed, touchdown!  Jags win!

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

So...let me get this straight... You go silent on this board for almost a full day, and then started this thread the next day after the fact, simply for the sole purpose of discussing a play that helped us win the game just because it "Looked" like he didn't have control of the ball? Give us a break Mad Dog. It isn't worth it to lose the rest of our games, and losing all of this momentum and confidence, simply for the goal of drafting one player who may, or may not turn out to be a total bust in the end.

 

 

You're not fooling anyone.

---

So...let me get this straight... You go silent on this board for almost a full day, and then started this thread the next day after the fact, simply for the sole purpose of discussing a play that helped us win the game just because it "Looked" like he didn't have control of the ball? Give us a break Mad Dog. It isn't worth it to lose the rest of our games, and losing all of this momentum and confidence, simply for the goal of drafting one player who may, or may not turn out to be a total bust in the end.

 

 

You're not fooling anyone.

 

wut??

 

:wacko: :wacko:

---

He did, but he should have made sure to get his right foot in one more time to be safe, instead of taking a giant stride.

---

I thought the call was so unfair that I threw beer bottles at the TV.

---

i can see what tmd is talking about, he brings the ball in nicely with two hands and brings it down, if you don't count that as having control of the football, personally i thought he had control all the way through that motion and so the ball was secured, there is a bit of movement of the ball between his hands just after/ on his second step and the 3rd step comes down out of bounds.

 

i'm guessing the referees considered him to have control and so his two steps were counted, regardless shorts still should not have taken that risk and got his third foot in bound, easier said than done but would have made it less nerve wracking

---

The ball certainly looks like it is still moving/ not secure as he goes out of the EZ...

That's what I thought at first. After watching the replay a few times it looks like he is just moving to secure it in the preferred hand knowing he is going down. I'm guessing this is what the replay guys saw also

---