Catch - No-catch

[TXMike]

Would really like to hear from any NCAA officials who have seen plays like this one and what your supervisors have said to rule.

http://youtu.be/Rikn30H9osI

If this kid had been a runner it is a TD - no question.  But when is the process of completing the catch complete?

[Legacy Zebra]

He's going to the ground in the process of making the catch. He must maintain possession all the way through contact with the ground. That should have been incomplete.

[DallasLJ]

He's going to the ground in the process of making the catch. He must maintain possession all the way through contact with the ground. That should have been incomplete.

  Agreed.

[goodgrr]

I'd love to know what the officials were thinking when they ruled it a TD.

As has been said, he never maintained control, incomplete.

[goodgrr]

But when is the process of completing the catch complete?

My other thought was did they consider the catch complete and then he made a football move before crossing the GL but I can't see that.

[TXMike]

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/0ap2000000246515/Calvin-Johnson-rule-strikes-again

STart at 1:20 mark

[JasonTX]

You have to judge at what point does he have control and does he have control long enough to have had the time to make an act common to the game.  Those saying TD are saying that he gained control with 1 foot down and then he put the second foot down and reached across the goalline.  Taking that second step and reaching are both acts common to the game.  If that's what you are seeing, then the process has been completed.  That's a whole lot to process at live speed.  At live speed I would have incomplete and in my opinion live speed should be how you make a ruling.

[DallasLJ]

You have to judge at what point does he have control and does he have control long enough to have had the time to make an act common to the game.  Those saying TD are saying that he gained control with 1 foot down and then he put the second foot down and reached across the goalline.  Taking that second step and reaching are both acts common to the game.  If that's what you are seeing, then the process has been completed.  That's a whole lot to process at live speed.  At live speed I would have incomplete and in my opinion live speed should be how you make a ruling.

  I just cannot find a football move common to the game.  He is looking inside and the ball is thrown to his outside shoulder.  So, he turns his body to make the catch.  His body momentum, along with the velocity of the ball, take in across the goal line and he falls forward.  None of that is done "under control."  He did not complete the catch before going to the ground.  Would be incomplete at the 40 yard line, so incomplete in the EZ.

[Magician]

You get a lot more consistent with these when you use some of the commonly taught principles. One of them is maintaining control of the ball when going to the ground as part of making the catch. That's exactly what he's doing here. He did not maintain control so no catch.

[JasonTX]

  I just cannot find a football move common to the game.  He is looking inside and the ball is thrown to his outside shoulder.  So, he turns his body to make the catch.  His body momentum, along with the velocity of the ball, take in across the goal line and he falls forward.  None of that is done "under control."  He did not complete the catch before going to the ground.  Would be incomplete at the 40 yard line, so incomplete in the EZ.

I don't disagree.  I was just giving the reason that those who say TD.  To rule catch there should never be any question about it.

[fencewire]

That was incomplete...

[bossman72]

I'm going with incomplete.  I've seen a play where the receiver almost makes a 180 in trying to stretch for the first down.  I don't think this is enough to be considered a football move.

[AlUpstateNY]

I'm going with incomplete.  I've seen a play where the receiver almost makes a 180 in trying to stretch for the first down.  I don't think this is enough to be considered a football move.

The problem seems to be simply that these relatively new perceptions (football move, taken to and through contact with the ground) are flagrantly SUBJECTIVE, and very much like "Beauty" are totally and completely, "in the eye of the beholder".

It seems far too often, efforts to explain and clarify tend only to create more opportunity for argument and disagreement.

[TXMike]

I can deal with the "new" concepts when we are ruling on the normal play with an airborne receiver who comes to ground and immediately falls down.  If we had a runner advancing from the the field of play in the same manner as this receiver was we would rule TD  - no brainier . But this artificial creation of what it takes to prove possession is troublesome.  How many of these falling steps must he take before we rule he had possession ? Or is it as simple as just saying if he ever falls to ground he must keep possession?

[Wingmanbp]

None of his steps were under control. All of them were taking him to the ground therefore it is the immediate action following him trying to gain possession of the ball. Had he taken those steps under control and then lost the ball diving into the endzone that's a whole different story. That's the way I see it anyway

[Rulesman]

...this artificial creation of what it takes to prove possession is troublesome.  How many of these falling steps must he take before we rule he had possession ? Or is it as simple as just saying if he ever falls to ground he must keep possession?

A very similar play happened in the NFL yesterday (think it was the Pitt/KC game). IMO, their philosophies have been allowed to filter down into the lower levels of the game creating exactly what Mike describes: an artificial creation of mass confusion and individualk opinion. Not that he's infallable, but Mike Carey couldn't even agree with the ruling and replay confirmation of the call on the field. I bet Pereria, in all of his wisdom (sarcastically stated), couldn't either.

[goodgrr]

How do you feel the NFL's philosophies differ from NCAA (or what should be NCAA)?

I have Game Pass so would like to review the play, if you find it let me know time and Q so i can take a look please.

[Rulesman]

How do you feel the NFL's philosophies differ from NCAA (or what should be NCAA)?

I don't think they differ that much. With the supervisory influence of those who wear both hats, I believe they are getting closer and closer. My comments were made in agreement with TXMike: ...this artificial creation of what it takes to prove possession is troublesome.

[DallasLJ]

I don't think they differ that much. With the supervisory influence of those who wear both hats, I believe they are getting closer and closer. My comments were made in agreement with TXMike: ...this artificial creation of what it takes to prove possession is troublesome.

  I disagree.  No more troublesome than other rulings.  Simply getting your hands on the ball has never been considered a catch.  If you start with when in doubt rules -- it is incomplete -- make the Receiver earn the catch.  No cheap fumbles and no cheap TDs.  So, make the Receiver catch the ball -- and then do something -- otherwise he hasn't possessed it long enough to "complete the catch" and create a fumble or score a TD.

[TXMike]

This play is from a bowl game last night.  http://youtu.be/PqB5488l1JU    How is this different from the original play in this thread?

[bossman72]

This play is from a bowl game last night.  http://youtu.be/PqB5488l1JU    How is this different from the original play in this thread?

This is almost exactly like the play I was referring to earlier!!

This was two distinct moves.  The one in the original post looks like everything was all in one motion as he was going down.  It's hard to describe, but this play, the extra "torque" by his mid section makes it seem like he has complete control of the ball and his body when he does the secondary act of stretching out.

I know it sounds crazy, but the original play I feel is incomplete and this one I feel is a catch and down by rule.  Don't ask me why... I just see it that way.  !!

[Redriverref]

The ground caused the seperation which makes it an incomplete pass. Either way..........I could not get over the way the Fox announcers were having FITS on the call and saying it was a good call when they are clueless on the rule.

[TxSkyBolt]

He took at least 3 steps after the reception. The HS kid didn't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk