• Have something to say? Register Now! and be posting in minutes!

Another BS catch rule screw up.

Cincyfan78

Well-Known Member
9,951
1,539
173
Joined
Aug 12, 2011
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
If he doesn't make the whole catch then how can it be a touchdown?

You have to get clear possession first. We are talking about 7 points here. Not just some sideline.
2 feet, with the ball, in the endzone - whole possession. Since you can't fumble or advance a ball in the endzone - you don't need the "full" range of to the ground to be applicable here.

The reason you would want this to be a rule in the field of play, again, is because not holding onto the ball through the catch would result in a massive amount of fumbles being induced. Since that can't be the case in the endzone, the "through" part of the catch doesn't need apply.

I mean - take the Chase factor away from this - and I still think that's the right rule to be in place here. There's no reason a WR with the ball, and 2 feet in the endzone shouldn't be a catch. It also removes the ambiguity of the call because we've seen catches made like this that have been upheld as TD's - how long does the WR have to hold onto the ball? Until he gets up? In the chase instance - how long does the defender get to rip a ball/hand away to cause an incompletion? So much is up for interpretation - in the endzone, that can be completely removed by simply stating that a receiver, with the ball, in bounds, in the endzone - has possession of the ball - is a TD.
 

Cave_Johnson

R.I.P. Bob Saget
8,930
3,021
293
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Hoopla Cash
$ 2,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
It looked to me after a few replays that Chase was bobbling the ball just a bit as he was going out of bounds. Then he lost control and had it dislodged when he hit the ground.

I'm not one to defend the refs but by rule I think that one was correct.
 

Southieinnc

Do Your Job!
23,878
8,425
533
Joined
Jul 3, 2013
Location
Out of the desert!
Hoopla Cash
$ 9,479.84
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
It looked to me after a few replays that Chase was bobbling the ball just a bit as he was going out of bounds. Then he lost control and had it dislodged when he hit the ground.

I'm not one to defend the refs but by rule I think that one was correct.
See post #3
 

ducky

Well-Known Member
6,763
3,090
293
Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Wish the video went a little longer, when goes to ground see ball move even more (can see a little at very end of video).



Hmm. I don't know what the controversy is. He clearly doesn't have possession of the ball before he is out of bounds.
 

Ickey Shuffle

Do you have a minute to talk about Joe Burrow?
Supporting Member Level 1
6,167
1,235
173
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Location
Rumble in the Jungle
Hoopla Cash
$ 200.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
The retard refs got it wrong yet again. The league is still a joke. They are desperate to keep games close.

Nope, they are not retarded. The refs knew exactly what they're doing. Bengals just don't give a shit. Just annihilate them and the opposition.






Well, maybe they are retarded.
 

Old Lion

R.I.P. Trump Lion
18,775
4,781
293
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Location
Emerald City, OZ
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Wish the video went a little longer, when goes to ground see ball move even more (can see a little at very end of video).

This idiot has no clue. He caught the ball and had control then left foot hits then right foot hits while ball is tucked. play over. Then even after milano nudges the ball he tucks it again with right hand and both left and right foot hits again in bounds. Finally he hits the ground out of bounds and ball bobbles. The surviving the ground nonsense only applies if his feet never touch the ground.

Dude made a legit catch twice and had it taken away.
 

calsnowskier

Sarcastic F-wad
54,839
12,379
1,033
Joined
Aug 11, 2010
Location
San Diego
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,400.09
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
This idiot has no clue. He caught the ball and had control then left foot hits then right foot hits while ball is tucked. play over. Then even after milano nudges the ball he tucks it again with right hand and both left and right foot hits again in bounds. Finally he hits the ground out of bounds and ball bobbles. The surviving the ground nonsense only applies if his feet never touch the ground.

Dude made a legit catch twice and had it taken away.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Have you never seen catches overturned because the receiver did not “complete the catch”? This isn’t anything new. If the ball is jarred loose by the ground, the catch did not happen.

this play isn’t really all that controversial. It is pretty cut and dry.
 

Old Lion

R.I.P. Trump Lion
18,775
4,781
293
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Location
Emerald City, OZ
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
You have no idea what you are talking about. Have you never seen catches overturned because the receiver did not “complete the catch”? This isn’t anything new. If the ball is jarred loose by the ground, the catch did not happen.

this play isn’t really all that controversial. It is pretty cut and dry.
Wrong. Read the rules. Once a football move is made the ground means nothing. Just tucking the ball is considered a football move.

You are even more clueless then the guy in the video. At least he knew the rule, he just didnt watch closely enough.

Also, enjoy the ass kicking you are going to get by the eagles Sunday.
 

calsnowskier

Sarcastic F-wad
54,839
12,379
1,033
Joined
Aug 11, 2010
Location
San Diego
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,400.09
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Wrong. Read the rules. Once a football move is made the ground means nothing. Just tucking the ball is considered a football move.

You are even more clueless then the guy in the video. At least he knew the rule, he just didnt watch closely enough.

Also, enjoy the ass kicking you are going to get by the eagles Sunday.
He never secured the ball. It was spinning on his way down. When he hit the ground, it was clearly jarred loose.

Incomplete pass.
 

Dr. Strangelove

Well-Known Member
7,761
3,691
293
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Location
Moncton, New Brunswick
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
He never secured the ball. It was spinning on his way down. When he hit the ground, it was clearly jarred loose.

Incomplete pass.
This exactly. The ball was moving the entire time and was never secured until well after he was laying out of bounds. Unless you call his dick securing the ball because it was rolling around his crotch the entire time. At any rate, it's a moot point and this whole conversation is stupid.
 

cincygrad

Offensive Line Consultant
12,038
1,374
173
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
I can see the call both ways and I felt that way on Sunday (even though I wanted it to stand as originally called because I'm a fan)..... But, one issue the league has with ruling a catch is the role of the ball moving. We now call it a catch if a receiver has control of a ball that hits the turf, even if the turf makes the ball move a little. The idea being that even though the ball is moving, it is clear that the receiver is maintaining possession. In the case of this touchdown, the ball is moving throughout the process, but to me, it's never not securely a catch. He has possession, maintains possession through contact and the ground.

I think the way it is written, the ruling should be incomplete. But, like all NFL completion/incompletion rules, there is way too many contradictory factors and it is leading to us watching super slow motion instant replays to determine outcomes rather than using our own eyes.
 

fightinfunbags

Well-Known Member
32,292
19,112
1,033
Joined
Apr 17, 2020
Location
Hatfield PA
Hoopla Cash
$ 0.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
I can see the call both ways and I felt that way on Sunday (even though I wanted it to stand as originally called because I'm a fan)..... But, one issue the league has with ruling a catch is the role of the ball moving. We now call it a catch if a receiver has control of a ball that hits the turf, even if the turf makes the ball move a little. The idea being that even though the ball is moving, it is clear that the receiver is maintaining possession. In the case of this touchdown, the ball is moving throughout the process, but to me, it's never not securely a catch. He has possession, maintains possession through contact and the ground.

I think the way it is written, the ruling should be incomplete. But, like all NFL completion/incompletion rules, there is way too many contradictory factors and it is leading to us watching super slow motion instant replays to determine outcomes rather than using our own eyes.
The thing that complicates this view of possession is the unseating of the ball occurring simultaneous and a result of the play of the defender’s action on the ball. If the action occurred naturally with no physical impact of the defense on the ball I think it’s easier to interpret as that’s enough for control.
 
Top