Yes, the ball did move when it hit the ground, but that is not the issue. There were two other issues which the refs ignored which should have rendered the touchdown good.
One: the intervening "football move." If, after catching the ball, the receiver makes a "football move" then survival of contact with the ground is no longer an issue. That move can be, but is not limited to, turning to run with the ball, or taking a completed step. Jesse James caught the ball, went to his knees facing away from the goal line, turned and reached the ball across the goal, overbalanced as a result of reaching across the goal, went to the ground and the ball moved when it hit the ground.
If turning and reaching the ball across the goal is not "a football move," I would like to know what is. He did not overbalance as a result of catching the ball, he overbalanced as a result of reaching across the goal. The football move of turning and reaching across the goal line rendered survival of contact with the ground moot.
Two: the ball crossing the plane of the goal. By rule, when the ball crosses the plane of the goal in the control of an offensive player, it is ruled as a touchdown, regardless of what happens to the ball afterward. Clearly, James had the ball firmly in both hands when it crossed the plane of the goal, so it should have been ruled a touchdown.
The announcers were focused on whether or not the ball moved when it hit the ground, but didn't even stop th think about whether or not that mattered.
= new reply since forum marked as read
