Why was that not deemed a successful onside recovery by Funchess?

[Thanatos]

Just now, CatTower said:

What constitutes possession in your eyes?  He has to hold the ball for 1 seconds, 2 seconds?  Does it say that in the rulebook?

He can't trap the ball against the ground, and yes, it says that in the rulebook.

[CatTower]

1 minute ago, Thanatos said:

He can't trap the ball against the ground, and yes, it says that in the rulebook.

You're talking about a catch, this is an attempt to secure possession and he has his hand under the ball. 

[CatTower]

Just wait until Gamepass releases the recording of this.  I will get you an even better image that clearly shows Devin Funchess had control of this ball before hitting out of bounds.

[Thanatos]

4 minutes ago, CatTower said:

Just wait until Gamepass releases the recording of this.  I will get you an even better image that clearly shows Devin Funchess had control of this ball before hitting out of bounds.

Stills are very deceiving. Give me a video of it and I'll look at it. I think you're reaching hard for this.

[bobsfoodbasics]

6 minutes ago, CatTower said:

Just wait until Gamepass releases the recording of this.  I will get you an even better image that clearly shows Devin Funchess had control of this ball before hitting out of bounds.

Just touching the ball doesn't make it possession.

[CatTower]

Just now, bobsfoodbasics said:

Just touching the ball doesn't make it possession.

Dude he's got both hands on it.  This Devin Funchess, you think he's just touching the ball there?  He is grabbing it and less than 1 second later he's tossing it up in the air.  I don't know whos capable of doing that unless they had firm control of the ball somewhere in there and what I'm saying is that the firm control happened before he hit out of bounds.

[Yaboychris28]

Ehh it was the right call. Awesome effort by Funchess but i'm not gonna argue with the refs on that one, even though they fuged us all game

[CatTower]

If he didn't toss the ball at all, I'm almost sure the NFL would've ruled it our possession.  The problem was he made them second guess whether he had possession before he hit out of bounds.  Either way, they should have sided with the call on the field of Carolinas ball since there was not enough visual evidence to make it Saints ball.

[2points]

1 hour ago, rbsponsel52 said:

Facts are there and you as a blind Aints fan just can't see them. At least Panthers don't have a history of headhunting unlike your Tainted Aints.

Dont have much of a history period actually.....

[2points]

11 minutes ago, CatTower said:

If he didn't toss the ball at all, I'm almost sure the NFL would've ruled it our possession.  The problem was he made them second guess whether he had possession before he hit out of bounds.  Either way, they should have sided with the call on the field of Carolinas ball since there was not enough visual evidence to make it Saints ball.

Reaaaccccccchhhhh.... the still pictures dont do it justice.. Wasn't actually close to him having possession; hell, the sideline even knew it hence why NO ONE complained

[CatTower]

Just now, 2points said:

Reaaaccccccchhhhh.... the still pictures dont do it justice.. Wasn't actually close to him having possession; hell, the sideline even knew it hence why NO ONE complained

NO ONE complained because NO ONE could believe the miraculous play just made by Devin Funchess.  I'm still sitting in disbelief at how he was able to do that, yet the proof is there. 

[2points]

2 minutes ago, CatTower said:

NO ONE complained because NO ONE could believe the miraculous play just made by Devin Funchess.  I'm still sitting in disbelief at how he was able to do that, yet the proof is there. 

haha.. ok

 

Trying to find a video, but it seems as if you know more about the rulebook than both announcers, Mike Pereira and the officials in new york do

[brandon_87]

2 hours ago, CatTower said:

No, he didn't.  He had both his hands on the ball securely and then flipped it up to Jacobs.  He clearly had possession before hitting the out of bounds line.  

As he got possession, he was going out of bounds,the entire flip up to Jacobs was while he was out of bounds. Wasn't even a question if he was in or not.

 

 

why does thia board see things only as if we get screwed over for everything? Jesus Christ

[CatTower]

2 minutes ago, brandon_87 said:

As he got possession, he was going out of bounds,the entire flip up to Jacobs was while he was out of bounds. Wasn't even a question if he was in or not.

 

 

why does thia board see things only as if we get screwed over for everything? Jesus Christ

Exactly.  He had possession, then he went out of bounds(play is dead), then he flipped it up to Jacobs(irrelevant, but does demonstrate he had control).