What should the catch rule be?

[Super Dave]

What was interesting is the following;

1) Al Riveron was not in NY, he was at the game.
2) So was his boss.
3) The league could not afford such mickey mouse shenanigans on such a high profile stage.
4) During the Clements catch the stadium which was probably 70-30 Iggle Fans were counting out the steps so all the refs could hear and understand ONE, TWO....next replay.....ONE TWO.......Next replay ONE TWO. Eventually they cut out the first step....stopped showing it completely.
5) League was under tremendous scrutiny ever since the James catch reversal. Everyone in the world knew that was a catch except certain zip codes in the Northeast and Omar.

 

[ark steel]

Did you have control of the ball with both feet in bounds. Yes? Catch. No? Not a catch.

Control shouldn't mean, when you hit the ground, the ball moves a fraction of an inch.

 

[SteelerFan448]

They wernt similar at all. Two different plays.

You guys saying the plays aren't even close have had your thinking changed by the ridiculous rules the NFL has in place. Take that out of the equation and you can see a guy with clear possession of the ball losing control of the ball because of the ground. Very similar in that aspect.

College doesnt seem to have the same controversy surrounding this. Maybe they need to look at their rules.

One foot down. Too easy for the NFL.

I am all in on the two feet down with possession and I am comfortable with this being a catch:

 

[jitter77]

The James and Ertz catch were not similar. JJ was not established as a runner while Ertz was. 2 sets of rules. Refs got both calls correct if you take off the homer glasses

 

[antdrewjosh]

You guys saying the plays aren't even close have had your thinking changed by the ridiculous rules the NFL has in place. Take that out of the equation and you can see a guy with clear possession of the ball losing control of the ball because of the ground. Very similar in that aspect.



One foot down. Too easy for the NFL.

I am all in on the two feet down with possession and I am comfortable with this being a catch:

I agree but you can only go by what the rule is not what we want the rules to be

 

[slashsteel]

I agree but you can only go by what the rule is not what we want the rules to be

The rule changes per team and ref. If there was consistency sobeit. This debate has went full circle. And I am glad it is being revised so the refs can't interpret it as they like case by case, team by team.

 

[SteelerFan448]

I agree but you can only go by what the rule is not what we want the rules to be

Part of the reason for the rule change, IMO, is the complete backlash it received from the fans and finally the national media. The pressure what put on the NFL for not accepting that crap rule and hopefully after years of waiting we'll finally get a change in the positive direction.

 

[Steel G]

The James and Ertz catch were not similar. JJ was not established as a runner while Ertz was. 2 sets of rules. Refs got both calls correct if you take off the homer glasses

JJ didn't need to be a runner because all he needed was a lunge into the endzone. This idea that a guy has to be running to establish himself is what's bullshit. Both guys caught the ball and did what they needed to do to get the ball across the goal line. That's how they were similar and comparing them makes perfect sense. They only become different when you apply some stupid rules that make no sense.

 

[jitter77]

JJ didn't need to be a runner because all he needed was a lunge into the endzone. This idea that a guy has to be running to establish himself is what's bullshit. Both guys caught the ball and did what they needed to do to get the ball across the goal line. That's how they were similar and comparing them makes perfect sense. They only become different when you apply some stupid rules that make no sense.

Not saying the rules make sense, but the difference is JJ was going to the ground as he was catching the ball do he had to survive the ground. JJs ball moved and the nose touched the ground. Ertz took several steps with the ball before diving into the EZ so once he broke the line the play was over.

 

[SteelerSask2]

You guys saying the plays aren't even close have had your thinking changed by the ridiculous rules the NFL has in place. Take that out of the equation and you can see a guy with clear possession of the ball losing control of the ball because of the ground. Very similar in that aspect.



One foot down. Too easy for the NFL.

I am all in on the two feet down with possession and I am comfortable with this being a catch:

Im not talking feet down. Im asking what is the college rule for surviving the ground and posession when lunging for the goal line or first down.

 

[wig]

Missed in ALL of this is the back of end zone shot that showed James hand UNDER the ball the entire time. The ball did NOT hit the ground. It was on his right hand and there's a shot that shows it.

Riveron ignored that shot. He did not have conclusive evidence that James ever lost control of the ball. In fact, quite the opposite, he had evidence that James kept it OFF the ground the entire time.

 

[wig]

But... Last night they went the other way and cheater fans be cryin'

 

[jitter77]

Missed in ALL of this is the back of end zone shot that showed James hand UNDER the ball the entire time. The ball did NOT hit the ground. It was on his right hand and there's a shot that shows it.

Riveron ignored that shot. He did not have conclusive evidence that James ever lost control of the ball. In fact, quite the opposite, he had evidence that James kept it OFF the ground the entire time.

It was not off the ground the entire time. T
It was pretty clear the nose of the ball touched the ground for a spilt second.

 

[antdrewjosh]

Missed in ALL of this is the back of end zone shot that showed James hand UNDER the ball the entire time. The ball did NOT hit the ground. It was on his right hand and there's a shot that shows it.

Riveron ignored that shot. He did not have conclusive evidence that James ever lost control of the ball. In fact, quite the opposite, he had evidence that James kept it OFF the ground the entire time.

And thats where we were ****** on the call..right there no conclusive evidence to overturn it

 

[Stryker]

The only rule change they can make, is when a player is going to the ground, and reaches the ball forward with control, the ground can't cause the incompletion.

Or simply state, that a player crossing the plane of the EZ with the ball in their possession is a TD. Anything that happens after that moment doesn't matter.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

The only rule change they can make, is when a player is going to the ground, and reaches the ball forward with control, the ground can't cause the incompletion.

Or simply state, that a player crossing the plane of the EZ with the ball in their possession is a TD. Anything that happens after that moment doesn't matter.

Exactly, i.e. make it the same as it is for a runner.

 

[Coach]

It's ******* simple, possession, two feet down, it's a damn catch, that is something that can clearly be seen on a replay, take the stupid judgement call out of it

Sent from my XT1585 using Steeler Nation mobile app

And the ground can not cause the fumble. If the ball hits the ground while the catch is being made, its not a catch. James had the catch.

 

[Steeler Pride]

The James and Ertz catch were not similar. JJ was not established as a runner while Ertz was. 2 sets of rules. Refs got both calls correct if you take off the homer glasses

James had a knee down on the turf when he turned and lunged for the endzone. He may not have taken 2 steps, but he was every bit as much a runner at that point as Ertz was.

 

[Hines57]

Two feet down, football move. The rest of that **** with surviving the ground shouldn't be applicable unless you do not have control of the ball on the way down. You must have control of the football for it to be a catch prior to hitting the ground or going out of bounds.

They did the same bullshit to Troy when he INT'd Manning back in the 05' playoffs. Got up with an INT and he knee'd the ball free and they called it incomplete. Just ridiculous what the NFL does with its reviews and rules.

 

[Hines57]

James had a knee down on the turf when he turned and lunged for the endzone. He may not have taken 2 steps, but he was every bit as much a runner at that point as Ertz was.

Football move would be the dive toward the end zone. He had complete control of the football until he hit the ground.

 

[antdrewjosh]

This is the rule after the Dez bryant fiasco

Under the old rule, a player had to make a "football move" before the refs would rule that something close to a catch was actually a catch and not an incomplete pass.

Under the new rule, all a player has to do is "clearly establish himself as a runner."

Mike Pereira explaining it further

From Pereira's Twitter:

A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regain control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.


Mike Pereira
✔
@MikePereira
Dez Bryant play..rule rewritten. New word like "initial" contact with ground. Football move is gone. Bottom line its clearly incomplete

4:27 PM - Jul 23, 2015

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...-and-it-might-actually-be-more-confusing/amp/

"Football move" taken out and replaced with "clearly established as a runner" there is no football move in the rule james going to the ground and having a knee down does not equal clearly establishing himself as a runner.. therefore he must hold on to the ball thru out his dive over the GL.

 

[Steel G]

This is the rule after the Dez bryant fiasco

Under the old rule, a player had to make a "football move" before the refs would rule that something close to a catch was actually a catch and not an incomplete pass.

Under the new rule, all a player has to do is "clearly establish himself as a runner."

Mike Pereira explaining it further

From Pereira's Twitter:

A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regain control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.


Mike Pereira
✔
@MikePereira
Dez Bryant play..rule rewritten. New word like "initial" contact with ground. Football move is gone. Bottom line its clearly incomplete

4:27 PM - Jul 23, 2015

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...-and-it-might-actually-be-more-confusing/amp/

"Football move" taken out and replaced with "clearly established as a runner" there is no football move in the rule james going to the ground and having a knee down does not equal clearly establishing himself as a runner.. therefore he must hold on to the ball thru out his dive over the GL.

Again, James didnt need to run because he was trying to ******* score! Trying to fit the rules wording into what James did on that play is why it doesn't work and is stupid. He caught the ******* ball, lunged for the goal line. If that play happens on the 50, he doesnt lunge, he just rolls over or falls down and the play is over. Him lunging was not a part of him trying to catch the ball, it was him trying to score. God damn, it isnt this hard to understand.

 

[antdrewjosh]

Again, James didnt need to run because he was trying to ******* score! Trying to fit the rules wording into what James did on that play is why it doesn't work and is stupid. He caught the ******* ball, lunged for the goal line. If that play happens on the 50, he doesnt lunge, he just rolls over or falls down and the play is over. Him lunging was not a part of him trying to catch the ball, it was him trying to score. God damn, it isnt this hard to understand.

From Pereira's Twitter:

A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regain control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

Jesus christ where in the above statement does "trying to score" come into play.

 

[Coryea]

From Pereira's Twitter:

A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regain control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

Jesus christ where in the above statement does "trying to score" come into play.

The bolded part, he did maintain possession after his initial contact with the ground, his knee was the initial contact with the ground and he had possession when his knee hit and after his knee hit. They can't even interpret their own ******* rules.

 

[Stryker]

The bolded part, he did maintain possession after his initial contact with the ground, his knee was the initial contact with the ground and he had possession when his knee hit and after his knee hit. They can't even interpret their own ******* rules.

If you're going to the ground, you have to maintain possession after your entire body hits the ground. That's what going to the ground means.