Jump to content

NFL to review catch rule (again)


Broncofan

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, youngosu said:

Which is of course why the NFL should just get rid of replay but that is a bigger discussion. 

 

That said, the NFL had replay in the 80's and early 90's but did not have an issue determining what a catch was then. The problem is that they aren't letting common sense be used. 

The NFL didn't have as extensive of a replay system in the 80's and 90's. Most of the time these plays that we are arguing stood as called on the field whether they are right or wrong. The problem isn't common sense either. It's that they want consistency. Most of these plays we are complaining about are basically goal line situations where fans want to say "well he had control across the goal line so he has an auto TD" the same way a runner who actually has possession of the ball would  be granted a TD for breaking the plane. But if this happened in the middle of the field they'd say it's incomplete. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, lancerman said:

The NFL didn't have as extensive of a replay system in the 80's and 90's. Most of the time these plays that we are arguing stood as called on the field whether they are right or wrong. The problem isn't common sense either. It's that they want consistency. Most of these plays we are complaining about are basically goal line situations where fans want to say "well he had control across the goal line so he has an auto TD" the same way a runner who actually has possession of the ball would  be granted a TD for breaking the plane. But if this happened in the middle of the field they'd say it's incomplete. 

 

Disagree, plenty of mistakes get made in the middle of the field too. They just aren't as controversial as the endzone ones. I'd actually argue far more egregious errors get made between the 20s on the catch rule. Most of the one's people gripe about in the endzone are correctly ruled incomplete even if you are simply using common sense so I'd argue it is about common sense. Catching the ball must work the same way rather in the endzone or at the 50 yard line. What you are saying is fans want inconsistency in the calls when they are in the endzone. 

 

I can think of 1 play where the receiver caught the ball,  literally ran for 5 yards, fell to the ground, and they ruled that it was incomplete because he was stretched out and bent over when he made the catch and remained bent over for all 5 yards of running. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TXsteeler said:

By who's definition? Common sense says turning and reaching is a football move.

By the league's definition..... 

People get confused and think any deliberate move is a football move. It's not. A football move has one purpose and one purpose only in the game of football. The entire concept of it is to establish someone as a runner with possession of the ball. It's a transition move from a receiver to a runner. If you a receiver who is falling before you establish yourself as a runner you by definition cannot be a runner unless you maintain control of the ball and get up untouched and then make a football move.

Think of it this way, there are TWO ways to make a catch. 

1. To catch the ball, maintain possession, and then make a football move and establish yourself as a runner. Transitioning from receiver to ball carrier. 

2. To catch the ball and maintain possession throughout out a fall without losing it at any point while going to the ground. 

When people say "common sense says turning and reaching is a football move" it completely misses the point of the point of a football move. If people understood the concepts better this rule wouldn't be an issue. It's just people generally don't and get confused. Then it's made even more complicated on grey area plays. But then general rule of thumb should be, if the receiver is falling, the ball should never touch the ground

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, lancerman said:

By the league's definition..... 

People get confused and think any deliberate move is a football move. It's not. A football move has one purpose and one purpose only in the game of football. The entire concept of it is to establish someone as a runner with possession of the ball. It's a transition move from a receiver to a runner. If you a receiver who is falling before you establish yourself as a runner you by definition cannot be a runner unless you maintain control of the ball and get up untouched and then make a football move.

Think of it this way, there are TWO ways to make a catch. 

1. To catch the ball, maintain possession, and then make a football move and establish yourself as a runner. Transitioning from receiver to ball carrier. 

2. To catch the ball and maintain possession throughout out a fall without losing it at any point while going to the ground. 

When people say "common sense says turning and reaching is a football move" it completely misses the point of the point of a football move. If people understood the concepts better this rule wouldn't be an issue. It's just people generally don't and get confused. Then it's made even more complicated on grey area plays. But then general rule of thumb should be, if the receiver is falling, the ball should never touch the ground

How qualified is the NFL to define "football move" if they can't even define what a catch is? How many NFL owners and board members have played the game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TXsteeler said:

How qualified is the NFL to define "football move" if they can't even define what a catch is? How many NFL owners and board members have played the game?

And here I thought the competition committee was defining it. Silly me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mse326 said:

And here I thought the competition committee was defining it. Silly me.

Well they were the ones who screwed up what a catch is aren't they? Again, how is this committee truly qualified when they can't determine what a catch is but 5 year olds can? Too much CTE?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TXsteeler said:

Well they were the ones who screwed up what a catch is aren't they? Again, how is this committee truly qualified when they can't determine what a catch is but 5 year olds can? Too much CTE?

The problem is you think defining a catch is easier than it really is. Just because you like the simple definition doesn't mean it is a good one. It is actually horrible and would lead to 4 or 5 fumbles a game easy.

Oh, and it does negate the second part about owners and board members not playing. Almost everyone on the competition committee has played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TXsteeler said:

How qualified is the NFL to define "football move" if they can't even define what a catch is? How many NFL owners and board members have played the game?

Considering they had HOF WR’sblike Cris Carter help create the catch rules.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, mse326 said:

The problem is you think defining a catch is easier than it really is. Just because you like the simple definition doesn't mean it is a good one. It is actually horrible and would lead to 4 or 5 fumbles a game easy.

Oh, and it does negate the second part about owners and board members not playing. Almost everyone on the competition committee has played.

Did the NFL have this problem with the catch rule 20 years ago? Did the NFL have 4 to 5 fumbles a game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...