Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
2 Pages12>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Silentio  
#1 Posted : Monday, September 26, 2011 1:00:59 PM(UTC)
We had a discussion about Finley's (non-)TD catch against the Panthers two weeks ago. Peter Kings weighs in this week in Monday Morning QB:

Read the article here

Emphasis mine. I am in total agreement with King here. The rule is able to be understood using reason, but in practice it is absurd. There has to be a creative way for the NFL to standardize catches in and around the end zone that makes sense to players, coaches, and fans alike.
Zero2Cool  
#2 Posted : Monday, September 26, 2011 1:52:47 PM(UTC)
There's a link in my signature, please read its contents.



I'm not sure what a catch is any more either. I know the rules, I know what the rules say, but the enforcement of the rules appears to vary.
Greg C.  
#3 Posted : Monday, September 26, 2011 2:54:46 PM(UTC)
I accept the rule about controlling the ball to the ground, but that variation on it doesn't make sense to me. If the receiver is already in the end zone, it's not a catch, but apparently if the receiver is falling into the end zone, it is a catch. I don't get it at all.
Nonstopdrivel  
#4 Posted : Monday, September 26, 2011 2:59:16 PM(UTC)
Well, it's because the ground can't cause a fumble, you see. Unless that ground is painted the goal line. Then it can.[duh]
Silentio  
#5 Posted : Tuesday, September 27, 2011 1:50:07 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
There's a link in my signature, please read its contents.


Sorry about that, Zero. I’ll do better next time coach.
Dexter_Sinister  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, September 27, 2011 2:42:53 PM(UTC)
The thing that I am most disappointed with is there seems to be no delineation to the act of making a catch or to the act of going to the ground.

How far does the WR have to go before he goes to the ground before it is no longer the act of catching the ball. How far after hitting the ground does going to the ground last.

Calvin Johnson was actually getting up from the ground when he lost the ball.

Jennings lost the ball after getting his third step down out of bounds before going to the ground.

I watch when a WR took 2 steps out of bounds before hitting the ground, it was a catch before he hit the ground, but apparently if you go to the ground after making a catch getting both feet in bounds, taking two steps out of bound then hit the ground, the ground can cause an incompletion.

Where does the act of catching the ball end? My opinion is when possession is established by normal criteria. 2 feet down and a football related move. Which should include that 3rd step.

Going to the ground should end when your downward momentum is stopped. Either movement has stopped or the WR starts getting up without halting his momentum.
Greg C.  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, September 27, 2011 3:33:00 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister said: Go to Quoted Post
The thing that I am most disappointed with is there seems to be no delineation to the act of making a catch or to the act of going to the ground.

How far does the WR have to go before he goes to the ground before it is no longer the act of catching the ball. How far after hitting the ground does going to the ground last.

Calvin Johnson was actually getting up from the ground when he lost the ball.

Jennings lost the ball after getting his third step down out of bounds before going to the ground.

I watch when a WR took 2 steps out of bounds before hitting the ground, it was a catch before he hit the ground, but apparently if you go to the ground after making a catch getting both feet in bounds, taking two steps out of bound then hit the ground, the ground can cause an incompletion.

Where does the act of catching the ball end? My opinion is when possession is established by normal criteria. 2 feet down and a football related move. Which should include that 3rd step.

Going to the ground should end when your downward momentum is stopped. Either movement has stopped or the WR starts getting up without halting his momentum.


What they are looking at is whether the impact of hitting the ground causes the ball to be jarred loose. Usually that happens instantly, but sometimes it slips out a moment afterwards, as was the case with the Calvin Johnson play. I do think it was the impact of hitting the ground that caused him to drop that ball. He pretended afterwards that he had dropped it on purpose, but I never believed him, and that would be a very stupid thing to do anyway.
Zero2Cool  
#8 Posted : Tuesday, September 27, 2011 4:17:43 PM(UTC)
Greg C. said: Go to Quoted Post
I accept the rule about controlling the ball to the ground, but that variation on it doesn't make sense to me. If the receiver is already in the end zone, it's not a catch, but apparently if the receiver is falling into the end zone, it is a catch. I don't get it at all.



<puts on tinfoil hat>

Whichever referee is paid the most by the receiving team gets the call in their favor.
Dexter_Sinister  
#9 Posted : Tuesday, September 27, 2011 4:54:05 PM(UTC)
Greg C. said: Go to Quoted Post
What they are looking at is whether the impact of hitting the ground causes the ball to be jarred loose. Usually that happens instantly, but sometimes it slips out a moment afterwards, as was the case with the Calvin Johnson play. I do think it was the impact of hitting the ground that caused him to drop that ball. He pretended afterwards that he had dropped it on purpose, but I never believed him, and that would be a very stupid thing to do anyway.

That isn't my issue. The ball survived impact, Calvin rolled over and got his butt off the ground before he swung the ball around and hit the ground causing him to lose control of it. He was on his way back up.

That is the issue to me.

The initial impact didn't do anything.

How long after making a catch does the WR have to control the ball in the endzone before the play is over. 3 steps, 4 or mabye 5. What is the cut off. If a WR gets both feet down, gets knocked down by contact, does 3 somersaults, goes out of bounds, hits the goal post, lands on his left side and then drops the ball, is that still the process of the catch? If so, I disagree and it is a stupid interpretation of a good rule. That is a little extreme but if they don't say when the process ends, it never ends.

If the WR established possession by normal criteria before going to the ground, the ground shouldn't cause an incompletion. If he gets both feet in, then steps out of bounds and goes down, it should be a completion. The process should end when possession is established.
Nonstopdrivel  
#10 Posted : Tuesday, September 27, 2011 5:09:30 PM(UTC)
I would say this is a catch.:-"

mi_keys  
#11 Posted : Tuesday, September 27, 2011 8:41:41 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister said: Go to Quoted Post
That isn't my issue. The ball survived impact, Calvin rolled over and got his butt off the ground before he swung the ball around and hit the ground causing him to lose control of it. He was on his way back up.

That is the issue to me.

The initial impact didn't do anything.

How long after making a catch does the WR have to control the ball in the endzone before the play is over. 3 steps, 4 or mabye 5. What is the cut off. If a WR gets both feet down, gets knocked down by contact, does 3 somersaults, goes out of bounds, hits the goal post, lands on his left side and then drops the ball, is that still the process of the catch? If so, I disagree and it is a stupid interpretation of a good rule. That is a little extreme but if they don't say when the process ends, it never ends.

If the WR established possession by normal criteria before going to the ground, the ground shouldn't cause an incompletion. If he gets both feet in, then steps out of bounds and goes down, it should be a completion. The process should end when possession is established.


The issue you raise is also my biggest problem with how the rule has developed/been interpreted over the past several years. If I recall correctly the ruling on the Jennings drop was that he was going to the ground because the defender had jumped on him as he was catching the ball. Then again, in week 1 I saw Brandon Marshall make a catch going up with a defender, stumble taking two steps and lose the ball when he hit the ground trying to stretch out for more yardage as he was going down; and no one questioned it. I have yet to see one good, consistently applied definition of what going to ground in the process of making the catch means.

I'm speculating here, but I think this rule gets its roots in a controversial call in the '99 NFC Championship game between the Bucs and Rams: the Bert Emmanuel catch. I'm sure a number of you remember the play, but what looked like and felt like a catch was reviewed and ruled incomplete. It may well have cost Tampa Bay the game; and the rule was changed that offseason. For reference, here is the play:



And what they changed the rule to in 2000:

Quote:
A receiver has to have possession of the ball and control of the ball. If when making a catch and falling to the ground, the ball is allowed to touch the ground and still be considered a catch if the player maintains clear control of the ball.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_NFL_season

I think that's where the "must maintain control through the process of the catch when going to the ground" has come from. If that was the original intent, then I think the rule should be stripped back down to how that original play and interpretation would have played out. They should limit it to plays where the receiver has dove to make a catch or something similar, where the catch and collision . They should also clearly define when the process of making a catch while going to the ground has been completed, to eliminate terrible rulings like what they got with Calvin Johnson last year.
beast  
#12 Posted : Tuesday, September 27, 2011 9:50:19 PM(UTC)
Calvin catch was a catch (he just put it down too early)... it's just the NFL wanted to crack down on letting the ball go too soon and he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and the Refs called it and made him the poster boy for the rule.

But it's simple... catch the ball in bounds and hold onto it...

For a TD... catch the ball in bounds, have it in the TD area and hold onto it...

You have to prove possession ether way... if you don't prove possession it's then a drop... it's the same all over the field.

The different is simply where you prove possession... if you prove it before the end zone all you have to do it get the ball into the end zone... if you don't prove possession before the end zone you have to prove possession in the end zone.
Dexter_Sinister  
#13 Posted : Wednesday, September 28, 2011 7:12:01 AM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
Calvin catch was a catch (he just put it down too early)... it's just the NFL wanted to crack down on letting the ball go too soon and he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and the Refs called it and made him the poster boy for the rule.

But it's simple... catch the ball in bounds and hold onto it...

For a TD... catch the ball in bounds, have it in the TD area and hold onto it...

You have to prove possession ether way... if you don't prove possession it's then a drop... it's the same all over the field.

The different is simply where you prove possession... if you prove it before the end zone all you have to do it get the ball into the end zone... if you don't prove possession before the end zone you have to prove possession in the end zone.


How long do they have to hold on to it? What is the magic point in time when the process of making a catch ends you can hit the ground and not cause an incompletion? When does going to the ground end? How long after hitting the ground does that process go?

That is the problem your simple answer doesn't address. In a perfect world, the WR holds on to the ball until after he gets up and hands it to the official. The real world isn't perfect. The rules should explain when those processes start and end. But they are so open ended, that a guy can get both feet down in bounds with control, step on the boundry, take another step, and then land on the ground losing the ball and it is incomplete. Or a guy can make a catch in the end zone, get both feet down, get his butt down, roll over onto his knees and start getting up and lose the completion because the ball squirted out of his grip after he was up on one knee.

Real examples of how poorly this rule is interpreted.

My opinion is that when the receiver controls the ball, gets 2 feet down and makes any move, the process of making a catch is over. What happens after that follows according to a ball carrier with possession. If he falls and hits the ground untouched and loses the ball, it is live. If he is knocked down, the ground can't cause a fumble and he is down by contact.

If a player touches the boundary and is touching the Football, the play is instantly dead. What happens after that is not relevant. If he had control and 2 feet or a knee in bounds the play is dead as soon as he touches the boundary. If he doesn't have control, the play is dead without that player being in possession of the ball.

If a player goes to the ground without establishing possession by the normal rules of 2 feet down and a move, then he has to control the ball and not touch the boundry or let the ball touch the ground out of his control while going to the ground.

As far as the definition of when going to the ground ends, it should be when his downward momentum stops. Even if he bounces and hits the ground a second time causing him to lose the ball. If control survived initial contact with the ground, as long as the player is in the endzone, out of bounds or downed by contact, the catch is completed and play is over. If he is not downed by contact, out ov bounds or in the end zone it is a live ball.

They need clear delineation of when those two processes start and end.

beast  
#14 Posted : Wednesday, September 28, 2011 3:41:16 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister said: Go to Quoted Post
How long do they have to hold on to it? What is the magic point in time when the process of making a catch ends you can hit the ground and not cause an incompletion? When does going to the ground end? How long after hitting the ground does that process go?

That is the problem your simple answer doesn't address.


Because that answer is football 101... you play till the whistle blows... until the Refs rule the play dead...

Dexter_Sinister  
#15 Posted : Wednesday, September 28, 2011 3:48:37 PM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
Because that answer is football 101... you play till the whistle blows... until the Refs rule the play dead...



Arbitrary then.
beast  
#16 Posted : Wednesday, September 28, 2011 5:17:05 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister said: Go to Quoted Post
Arbitrary then.


No and you know that (or should if you know football 101). The Ref is suppose to blow the whistle when the play is over.
Dexter_Sinister  
#17 Posted : Thursday, September 29, 2011 7:30:01 AM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
No and you know that (or should if you know football 101). The Ref is suppose to blow the whistle when the play is over.

When is the play over? That is the arbitrary part.

The definitions don't state when going to the ground stops. Don't use circular logic and say at the whistle. When is the official supposed to blow the whistle according to the rules? I have seen them do it after the WR takes 2 steps out of bound and then hits the ground.

When does the process of catching a ball end? We need a concrete delineation of when the process of making a catch ends and possession is established. What happens after that should be according to the rules of a ball carrier with possession. Which is not the end of the play.

We also need to have a concrete delineation of when going to the ground ends. Not the arbitrary decision of the official. I think it should be initial impact with the ground. When all downward momentum has stopped. If they roll, bounce or get hit after that, that should be after the play is dead by the rules. Not by the official deciding arbitrarily.

You can't replay an arbitrary decision. You can't even get more than one person to concur on when exactly that point is. But downward momentum stopping is a much more finite point than the process of going to the ground.
PackerTraxx  
#18 Posted : Thursday, September 29, 2011 12:59:22 PM(UTC)
As ususal the NFL can't keep anything plain and simple. The interpretation should be the sam in the end zone as the rest of the field. They complicate instant replay even worse.
longtimefan  
#19 Posted : Thursday, September 29, 2011 1:15:09 PM(UTC)
Again, if the ground cant cause a fumble in the 100 yards of the field, why is it different in the endzones?
beast  
#20 Posted : Thursday, September 29, 2011 10:24:06 PM(UTC)
blah blah blah... I'm tired of the whining, complaining and excuses...

hold onto the ball in the end zone and it's a TD... it's simple as that...
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
gbguy20 (26-May) : doesn't seem to have helped his cause much
Zero2Cool (25-May) : Aaron Rodgers spoke with Falcons GM Thomas Dimitroff at an airport telling him to sign Matt Ryan
Zero2Cool (25-May) : Rodgers said, "We don't know each other that well, but just get this deal done with Matt first so I can get on with my life."
Zero2Cool (25-May) : Isn't it Laurel after three tries?
wpr (25-May) : Yanny. If it takes 3 tries it isn't worth it
wpr (25-May) : Damnit. Bit in the butt by Auto correct
wpr (25-May) : When Gianni's pronounced it it sounded like"Tammy"
beast (25-May) : Nonstop got it correct, but when Giannis said it, the Ant-teh-toh comes out very quickly, which is said to sound very "inauthentic" when english speakers try to speed it up, but natural to native Yoru
beast (25-May) : I just read an article (with videos) on how to say it... I might be able to say it the English way, but no way I can pronounce it like Giannis himself did.
Nonstopdrivel (25-May) : Ant teh toh koonm po (roughly)
Zero2Cool (25-May) : well if it's not t hat hard to say, then ...
Nonstopdrivel (25-May) : Assuming the name is Greek, it's not t hat hard to say.
Zero2Cool (25-May) : I don't even try his last name lol
beast (25-May) : Richie Incognito told police he’s involved with the NSA, being tracked by government
beast (25-May) : Can people say Giannis Antetokounmpo's name correctly? :P
Zero2Cool (24-May) : Giannis Antetokounmpo earns All-NBA honors
Zero2Cool (24-May) : Brewers (31-19, .620), off to their best 50-game start in franchise history, own the best record in the National League
Zero2Cool (24-May) : says they shouldn't profit while anthem being played
Zero2Cool (24-May) : 49ers closing concessions during anthem.
Zero2Cool (24-May) : Muhammad Wilkerson's top reason for signing with Packers: 'Aaron Rodgers'
Zero2Cool (24-May) : 2.5lbs ones anyway ... anything else is just showing off
Zero2Cool (24-May) : I can throw dumbells too!
beast (23-May) : Richie Incognito is being held for an involuntary mental evaluation after he was accused of throwing a dumbbell at another person
Nonstopdrivel (23-May) : Weird, I thought they had parted ways with him already. Apparently he was just on IR.
Zero2Cool (23-May) : Packers expected to visit with veteran tight end Marcedes Lewis
DarkaneRules (23-May) : And whether any improvement will be enough to make the team.
DarkaneRules (23-May) : Goodson wasn't very good but it's been a while. He gets an opportunity to show how he's improved.
Zero2Cool (23-May) : I still say Goodson is trash.
Zero2Cool (23-May) : Aaron Rodgers brought up CB Demetri Goodson unprompted on Tuesday. "He's made some plays already during the two days (of OTAs)."
beast (23-May) : Black 21.5" 5ms Widescreen LED Backlight‎
Zero2Cool (23-May) : VA2246M-LED
beast (22-May) : LB Mychal Kendricks anybody? ... good speed LB... and hoping he doesn't want to go play with his brother on the Vikings
Zero2Cool (22-May) : players picked from Nos. 1 to 21 in the first round receive fully guaranteed contracts.
beast (21-May) : Rumor is that Richie Incognito wants to retire, he just wanted to be released first so that he didn't have to play back any of his signing bonus.
Zero2Cool (21-May) : Bills have released G Richie Incognito -->>> ?? Packers?
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2018 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 9 @ 7:20 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Sep 16 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Sep 23 @ 12:00 PM
Redskins
Sunday, Sep 30 @ 12:00 PM
BILLS
Sunday, Oct 7 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Monday, Oct 15 @ 7:15 PM
49ERS
Sunday, Oct 28 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Nov 4 @ 7:20 PM
Patriots
Sunday, Nov 11 @ 12:00 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Nov 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Sunday, Nov 25 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Dec 2 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Dec 9 @ 12:00 PM
FALCONS
Sunday, Dec 16 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Dec 23 @ 12:00 PM
Jets
Sunday, Dec 30 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

25-May / Random Babble / Nonstopdrivel

25-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

24-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

24-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

24-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

22-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

22-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

Headlines