An idea to fix the " wtf is a catch?" Issue

[westerndecline]

1. Grasp and control

2. Two feet down

 

Once the feet are down there is no process, there is no survive the ground, anything else would be simply fumble.

 

Would this work?

 

Also each team is only allowed one replay ...that's it no reviews from the booth, no three or four replays... one replay one team you decide as a coach.

 

This was my friend's idea which sounded very simple and to the point

To me this makes way more sense because the process can't take forever or go back and forth from possession to not possession

Edited December 27, 2017 by westerndecline

[Punching Bag]

18 minutes ago, westerndecline said:

1. Grasp and control

2. Two feet down

 

Grasp and control is same issue Bills had in last game - instant change result zebra said he did not control ball.

 

Two feet down?  Simultaneously or one after the other?  Lots of plays are made with two feet never on ground at same time.

 

 

[westerndecline]

Grasp and control is amorphous... but it's the best we can come up with. any type of possession issue is going to be vague . my point is once grasp and control is established and then you have two feet whether at the same time or one after the other that's it! there is no continuing of the process.....

 

The problem in my mind is not the idea of possession and it being vague right now it's that the idea of possession goes on for well who knows is it when he hits the ground and gets up and decides to give it to the ref is it when he hits the ground and then the ball pops out is it when he catches it and then decides to throw the ball in stands and celebrates are those not catches

 

To me the problem is not simply possession it's the idea that possession must be continued on to what we're not really sure

5 minutes ago, Limeaid said:

 

Grasp and control is same issue Bills had in last game - instant change result zebra said he did not control ball.

 

Two feet down?  Simultaneously or one after the other?  Lots of plays are made with two feet never on ground at same time.

 

 

What the explanation was was that Benjamin did have control but his foot wasn't down supposedly but we all know it wasn't conclusive

Edited December 27, 2017 by westerndecline

[jr1]

stop having replay. They're !@#$ing up despite 4k screen resolution technology anyway

[westerndecline]

13 minutes ago, jr1 said:

stop having replay. They're !@#$ing up despite 4k screen resolution technology anyway

As much as I hate to admit this because I was one who was crying for replay in the late 90s I think you're right I'm willing to accept human error as "part of the game"

 

The constant stopping of the flow the game is ruining it micromanagement over officiation Etc

Edited December 27, 2017 by westerndecline

[Doc Brown]

I don't know when replay went from needing "indisputable video evidence" to overturn the call on the field to we'll just ignore the call on the field when making our decision.  I think a tweak to the catch rule should be the ground can't cause an incompletion if you have possession before hitting the ground (like the ground can't cause a fumble).

[westerndecline]

Just now, Doc Brown said:

I don't know when replay went from needing "indisputable video evidence" to overturn the call on the field to we'll just ignore the call on the field when making our decision.  I think a tweak to the catch rule should be the ground can't cause an incompletion if you have possession before hitting the ground (like the ground can't cause a fumble).

Do you agree that at some point the process must stop where would you define the end of a catch because to me thats the hang up

[Doc Brown]

5 minutes ago, westerndecline said:

Do you agree that at some point the process must stop where would you define the end of a catch because to me thats the hang up

It's tricky and I don't have an answer for it.  To me if you have the ball cradled and are going to the ground that's a catch regardless of what happens when you hit the ground.  I get that you need an objective standard for what a catch is even though it's frustrating when you just can't use common sense like on the Dez Bryant non catch against the Packers in the playoffs a few years back.

Edited December 27, 2017 by Doc Brown

[westerndecline]

It really may be best to just go back to having human error I actually wouldn't mind that to be honest now the flow of the game will be much better too

Human error adds to the drama of the game and its acceptable imo now 

 

The over officiating has gotten completely out of control the game takes almost 4 hours now which is f****** ridiculous

Id also like the corners to be able to have some contact with wrs similar to bb

 

No holding, no hitting but u can touch the wr past 5 yds...

 

Sometimes the refs do go by that standard where the corners can brush up first a wide receivers or touch them but I seen so many horrible calls the past 5 to 10 years it almost makes it impossible to play corner

[Doc Brown]

Another idea is to no longer have all touchdowns and turnovers automatically reviewed.  Give the coach three challenges and they lose a timeout if they lose a challenge.  Gives the game a better flow and puts more pressure on the head coach.

[westerndecline]

26 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Another idea is to no longer have all touchdowns and turnovers automatically reviewed.  Give the coach three challenges and they lose a timeout if they lose a challenge.  Gives the game a better flow and puts more pressure on the head coach.

Or just one review a game per team...

 

 I'm guessing the NFL does something in the offseason because it's so retarded right now

[Klaista2k]

What was the catch rule in the 80's/early 90's?

 

I say just go back to whatever it was in that era. Stop making it so damn complicated. 

[BUNCH OF MULARKEY]

John Madden has a book out called "One Knee Equals Two Feet". He titled that because when it first came to his attention he couldn't believe it. "The rule says two feet!", he said. "How can one knee equal two feet? It's one knee not two feet!"  

But the short answer is yes, if the one knee is in bounds and the player has control of the ball before any body parts touch out of bounds then it is unquestionably a catch. 
 

 

[Spiderweb]

Mirror the effect the ground has on a running back. The ground can't cause a fumble and it shouldn't cause an incompletion. Catch/control, two feet down.. 

[8-8 Forever?]

let the refs call the game.   three coaches challenges .  that's it.  no booth review of TDs, etc.  that's all crap.  the refs almost always always get it right.  if you think a TD is not a TD coach, challenge it.  

[Xwnyer]

Stop the frame by frame analysis.  Make replay a simple rewind of the video that has angle the official on field had and review if something was missed.  A one time replay of the play no frame by frame or other camera views.  See what the official saw that made the call.  One look.

[klos63]

8 hours ago, westerndecline said:

1. Grasp and control

2. Two feet down

 

Once the feet are down there is no process, there is no survive the ground, anything else would be simply fumble.

 

Would this work?

 

Also each team is only allowed one replay ...that's it no reviews from the booth, no three or four replays... one replay one team you decide as a coach.

 

This was my friend's idea which sounded very simple and to the point

To me this makes way more sense because the process can't take forever or go back and forth from possession to not possession

This may not have affected the Benjamin catch, but just like on a running play where the ground can't cause a fumble, make the same rule with a reception. Also, on a running play once the ball crosses the goal line, it's a TD, it should be the same on a reception.  Clay's endzone 'incompletion' should have been a TD, he had possession in the endzone.

[westerndecline]

Exactly the clay play should be a td

 

And fumble if in the reg field of play

[CLTbills]

7 hours ago, westerndecline said:

Do you agree that at some point the process must stop where would you define the end of a catch because to me thats the hang up

 

To me it was always "Make a football move" i.e. 2 steps, making a cut, etc. Which is, in my opinion, what the Steelers receiver did. Had clear possession and then made a football move 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

The ground cannot cause a fumble 

 

Make that a given.