Author Topic: Catch or no Catch ?  (Read 12737 times)

Offline BigWill

  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-1
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Catch or no Catch ?
« on: July 09, 2014, 08:42:46 AM »
Player established possession of a live ball left foot comes down followed by the right then falls to the ground and the ball comes out what do you have Catch or no Catch ?  ::)

Offline FLAHL

  • *
  • Posts: 733
  • FAN REACTION: +44/-9
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #1 on: July 09, 2014, 08:50:54 AM »
No catch.  If a player controls the ball while airborne but loses possession when he lands, there is no catch.  Put another way, the ground can cause an incomplete pass.  (According to Redding's)

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #2 on: July 09, 2014, 09:02:13 AM »
2-4-1:  A catch is the act of establishing player possession of a live ball
which is in flight, and first contacting the ground inbounds while maintaining
possession of the ball.
(emphasis added)

In other words, you have to survive contact with the ground.  Is there some judgment here?  Of course!  But the NFL and NCAA and making it more and more clear that possession has to be maintained throughout the contact with the ground, that's it's not an instantaneous thing.  While I don't usually advocate applying NFL or NCAA standards to HS football, this is one that is gravitating that way.  It's what coaches and players are expecting, call it that way and it will be more accepted.

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1268
  • FAN REACTION: +64/-22
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #3 on: July 09, 2014, 09:14:59 AM »
Incomplete. We do this for the sake of consistency. If we show a play and say "it's up to you," then we'll have half the room rule catch and half the room rule incomplete. If we tell you to wipe these out when they lose it going to the ground, then we will have greater consistency.

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2660
  • FAN REACTION: +325/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #4 on: July 09, 2014, 10:03:13 AM »
Incomplete. We do this for the sake of consistency. If we show a play and say "it's up to you," then we'll have half the room rule catch and half the room rule incomplete. If we tell you to wipe these out when they lose it going to the ground, then we will have greater consistency.
Good point ,Bossman. Page82 of 2014-15 Officials Manual has a guide for "When in question" and catch or no catch ??? ???= no catch ^no

Offline BigWill

  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-1
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #5 on: July 09, 2014, 02:27:40 PM »
Bossman so are we creating a rule on this only to be consistent ? the rule needs to be more clear on this do you agree should it say," establishing procession all the way to the ground"...food for thought I think its open for interpretation our rules interpeter  says its a catch so here we go.... I disagree with him
« Last Edit: July 09, 2014, 09:09:24 PM by BigWill »

Offline BigWill

  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-1
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #6 on: July 09, 2014, 09:10:14 PM »
Incomplete. We do this for the sake of consistency. If we show a play and say "it's up to you," then we'll have half the room rule catch and half the room rule incomplete. If we tell you to wipe these out when they lose it going to the ground, then we will have greater consistency                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                                                                         .                                  Does anyone think this is a catch? ...... hEaDbAnG
 
« Last Edit: July 09, 2014, 09:14:48 PM by BigWill »

Offline FLAHL

  • *
  • Posts: 733
  • FAN REACTION: +44/-9
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #7 on: July 10, 2014, 08:50:54 AM »
If you rule that a catch (which I wouldn't), then don't you have to rule fumble when the ball comes out?  That's going to lead to problems.  I think there's rule support (see AB's post above) and Redding's clearly says No Catch.  I know Redding's isn't the rule book, but I think the two are in sync here.

Offline Rulesman

  • The Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +329/-243
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #8 on: July 10, 2014, 09:31:33 AM »
I think there's rule support (see AB's post above) and Redding's clearly says No Catch.  I know Redding's isn't the rule book, but I think the two are in sync here.
Additional support can be found from someone on the Rules Committee: Ralph. See post #4 above.
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1268
  • FAN REACTION: +64/-22
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #9 on: July 11, 2014, 08:25:58 AM »
food for thought I think its open for interpretation our rules interpeter  says its a catch so here we go.... I disagree with him

Exactly my point.  This is why we're taught on close plays like this going to the ground or "bang bang" plays, rule them incomplete. 

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3423
  • FAN REACTION: +259/-498
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #10 on: July 11, 2014, 08:47:56 AM »
The thing about "Bang-Bang" plays is that no two are EXACTLY alike.  Each one merits it's own evaluation and judgment and it's YOUR approach and judgment that should be consistent, not necessarily the result.

Offline bkdow

  • *
  • Posts: 239
  • FAN REACTION: +9/-3
  • Striving for the impossible level of perfection
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #11 on: July 11, 2014, 09:25:24 AM »
I don't know if this belongs on this thread or a new one, but since it says Catch or No Catch, it can fit.  What would you rule (NFHS) if an airbourne player (assumingly prone to the ground) secures possession but when he hits the ground the ball clearly touches the ground but the player maintains control?  If you have an answer, what is your support?  Specific rule or judgemental experience?
"Don't let perfection get in the way of really good." John Lucivansky

Offline HLinNC

  • *
  • Posts: 2236
  • FAN REACTION: +65/-13
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #12 on: July 11, 2014, 09:35:13 AM »
Quote
airbourne player (assumingly prone to the ground)

Do you mean parallel?  You can't be prone and airborne at the same time.

Offline bkdow

  • *
  • Posts: 239
  • FAN REACTION: +9/-3
  • Striving for the impossible level of perfection
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #13 on: July 11, 2014, 09:59:29 AM »
yes
"Don't let perfection get in the way of really good." John Lucivansky

Offline FBUmp

  • *
  • Posts: 546
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-38
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #14 on: July 11, 2014, 10:57:53 AM »
I don't think we're reading the play correctly.

He FIRST contacted the ground when his foot touched the ground. He then touched the ground with his second foot.

If he possessed the ball when his foot touched the ground, then this is a catch. It makes no difference what happened after he fell to the ground, other than he is now down. It's NOT a fumble.

If he jumps for the ball, his first ground contact is with his body and the ball comes out, YES, that's an incomplete pass.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2014, 11:25:00 AM by FBUmp »

Offline FBUmp

  • *
  • Posts: 546
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-38
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #15 on: July 11, 2014, 11:02:01 AM »
If you rule that a catch (which I wouldn't), then don't you have to rule fumble when the ball comes out?  That's going to lead to problems.  I think there's rule support (see AB's post above) and Redding's clearly says No Catch.  I know Redding's isn't the rule book, but I think the two are in sync here.

When he possesses the ball while standing and then hits the ground, he is DOWN in NFHS football. It's not a fumble. The play is over.

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #16 on: July 11, 2014, 12:21:44 PM »
Do you mean parallel?  You can't be prone and airborne at the same time.
You have obviously never seen a David Copperfield show.


Offline BigWill

  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-1
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #17 on: July 11, 2014, 04:10:03 PM »
So in High School football even though it doesn't say it the player needs to maintain possession all the way through the catch ?... is this what we are going with ?........ ^no
« Last Edit: July 11, 2014, 09:42:12 PM by BigWill »

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 525
  • FAN REACTION: +107/-4
Re: Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #18 on: July 11, 2014, 07:51:51 PM »
So in High School football even though it doesn't say it the player need to maintain possession all the way through the catch ?... is this what we are going with this........ ^no

It's a good philosophy that fits with the rule. If he didn't maintain possession he didn't have firm grasp of the ball.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk


Offline FBUmp

  • *
  • Posts: 546
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-38
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #19 on: July 11, 2014, 09:32:26 PM »
So in High School football even though it doesn't say it the player need to maintain possession all the way through the catch ?... is this what we are going with this........ ^no

I guess some might, I would not.

You tell me if I'm wrong but I believe you're saying that:
1) A1 possesses the ball
2) Comes down with one foot inbounds (By rule, we now have a catch).
3) Comes down with his second foot (Now having taken two steps).
4) Falls to the ground (He is now down).
5) The ball comes out. (This is not a fumble as the receiver is DOWN!)

Only under NCAA and NFL rules does the receiver have to maintain possession all the way to the ground. I have no idea why we would apply those rules in NFHS play.

If he doesn't have control of the ball from the time his first foot touches until he hits the ground, then obviously it's incomplete. 

Under no circumstances will it be a fumble if he loses control after he hits the ground, so I don't know why that's being suggested.

My two cents.

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 525
  • FAN REACTION: +107/-4
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2014, 09:55:14 PM »
I guess some might, I would not.

You tell me if I'm wrong but I believe you're saying that:
1) A1 possesses the ball
2) Comes down with one foot inbounds (By rule, we now have a catch).
3) Comes down with his second foot (Now having taken two steps).
4) Falls to the ground (He is now down).
5) The ball comes out. (This is not a fumble as the receiver is DOWN!)

Only under NCAA and NFL rules does the receiver have to maintain possession all the way to the ground. I have no idea why we would apply those rules in NFHS play.

If he doesn't have control of the ball from the time his first foot touches until he hits the ground, then obviously it's incomplete. 

Under no circumstances will it be a fumble if he loses control after he hits the ground, so I don't know why that's being suggested.

My two cents.
Instead of going to the ground the receiver gets hit when the foot touches and the ball comes out, are you going to rule fumble?  That's a cheap catch/fumble.  Until last year the NCAA rule wording was very similar to the NFHS wording.  The "survive contact with the ground" and "bang-bang" aspects were more philosophy.  Using this philosophy creates a lot more consistency and prevents cheap turnovers.  And the philosophy still fits with the spirit and wording in the rule at the high school level.  Hopefully this is what your supervisors and rule interpreters are saying as well.  If not you need to follow what they say.

Offline FBUmp

  • *
  • Posts: 546
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-38
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2014, 10:41:33 PM »
Instead of going to the ground the receiver gets hit when the foot touches and the ball comes out, are you going to rule fumble?  That's a cheap catch/fumble.

You have to make a determination whether he possessed the ball or not. But that's not the original play. The original play had him catching the ball, taking two strides, falling to the ground and then the ball coming out, which by the way can never be a fumble.

The original play is not a fumble scenario. When the receiver hits the ground with the ball, you either have an incomplete pass OR the receiver is down, depending on whether he possessed the ball or not after his foot initially touches the ground.  Either way, it's not going to be a fumble.

Quote
Until last year the NCAA rule wording was very similar to the NFHS wording.  The "survive contact with the ground" and "bang-bang" aspects were more philosophy.  Using this philosophy creates a lot more consistency and prevents cheap turnovers.


How is the original play going to result in a turnover?

Quote
And the philosophy still fits with the spirit and wording in the rule at the high school level.  Hopefully this is what your supervisors and rule interpreters are saying as well.  If not you need to follow what they say.

I haven't heard anyone suggest this was an incomplete pass until reading this thread.

Please look at my post you quoted and tell me what is incorrect in those 5 points I posted. Always ready to learn.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2014, 11:12:03 PM by FBUmp »

Offline HLinNC

  • *
  • Posts: 2236
  • FAN REACTION: +65/-13
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #22 on: July 12, 2014, 06:57:03 AM »
This is what happens when an association begins to be influenced a bit it too much by their college level officials.  Without going into an Al-like epistle, always remember that we need to take into account the level of play, which NFHS rules tend to do.

The scenario described, when broken down step by step as was done, reads like a catch to me.  If one's own superiors want you to rule differently, it is up to them to explain it to their officials AND their coaches they serve.

Offline BigWill

  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-1
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #23 on: July 12, 2014, 07:42:45 AM »
FBUmp.... I don't know if this is gon'na change your thought process one foot down then the other its only 1 stride not 2....

Offline FBUmp

  • *
  • Posts: 546
  • FAN REACTION: +77/-38
Re: Catch or no Catch ?
« Reply #24 on: July 12, 2014, 09:24:32 AM »
FBUmp.... I don't know if this is gon'na change your thought process one foot down then the other its only 1 stride not 2....

In the air.
One foot down, one step, one stride completed.
Second foot down, two feet, two strides.

One stride or two strides, it doesn't matter. Only the first foot touching the ground is required to complete the catch. So no, it doesn't change my thought process or the rule. ;)