RememberTheRockpile Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Look like they are trying to fix stupid. Quote The NFL's rule making competition's committee is set to finalize and announce a new definition for the league's controversial catch rule, according to the Washington Post. The new rule will get rid of provisions pertaining to the slight movement of the football once it hits the receiver's hands and the going-to-the-ground requirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elite Poster Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Good thing these rules don't pertain to us, as we don't do the throwing and catching all that much! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzReaper Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 It is a dumb rule... If the guy has the ball it's a frickin catch. Why do they have to make it so complicated? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrEpsYtown Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 The will find a way to screw it up anyway. Especially with that idiot in charge again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston's #1 Bills Fan Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Do we get our touchdown against the Pats back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 It obviously made the league look very, very bad so they changed it without blaming new head of officiating (and defecating) who was making the calls without an explicit rule change. Oh and of course media article is as honest as linked article "Related slideshow: NFL cheerleaders". Yes NFL cheerleaders are related to poor calls by zebras. 1 minute ago, Houston's #1 Bills Fan said: Do we get our touchdown against the Pats back? No new rule says they can get a TD on us whenever they want saved in a bank. Of course that rule was not written down like changes in possession the league head honcho did via instant replay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay_Fixit Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 (edited) 22 minutes ago, GrizzReaper said: It is a dumb rule... If the guy has the ball it's a frickin catch. Why do they have to make it so complicated? Yup. Possession. Two feet/knee. Catch. Ground should have no part of this equation. Edited March 21, 2018 by Jay_Fixit 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston's #1 Bills Fan Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 10 minutes ago, Limeaid said: It obviously made the league look very, very bad so they changed it without blaming new head of officiating (and defecating) who was making the calls without an explicit rule change. Oh and of course media article is as honest as linked article "Related slideshow: NFL cheerleaders". Yes NFL cheerleaders are related to poor calls by zebras. No new rule says they can get a TD on us whenever they want saved in a bank. Of course that rule was not written down like changes in possession the league head honcho did via instant replay. hahaha - that was funny! (sadly, true though...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 34 minutes ago, GrizzReaper said: It is a dumb rule... If the guy has the ball it's a frickin catch. Why do they have to make it so complicated? Lets remember this when some guy going to the ground loses a ball and it’s called a catch still and upsets everyone. In reality it’s a really tough sequence to govern using a couple bullet points. Either you end up making it complex or you give refs a ton of leeway— neither loved by fans 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misterbluesky Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 19 minutes ago, Houston's #1 Bills Fan said: Do we get our touchdown against the Pats back? That's because the video judge,former ref,is buddies with Kraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 I thought this was the rule. "And we’ll go back to the old replay standard of reverse the call on the field only when it’s indisputable.” 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 18 minutes ago, Jay_Fixit said: Yup. Possession. Two feet/knee. Catch. Ground should have no part of this equation. Picture a guy standing. Ball hits his hands and he gets drilled. Ball comes out. How do you define possession? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay_Fixit Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 1 minute ago, NoSaint said: Picture a guy standing. Ball hits his hands and he gets drilled. Ball comes out. How do you define possession? Did he have possession? Because that’s how you define possession. Not difficult. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzReaper Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, NoSaint said: Lets remember this when some guy going to the ground loses a ball and it’s called a catch still and upsets everyone. In reality it’s a really tough sequence to govern using a couple bullet points. Either you end up making it complex or you give refs a ton of leeway— neither loved by fans Yeah I know it'll cause issues re: fumbles you're totally right. They really over do it though. There has to be a simpler way... That makes some sort of fricken sense. Maybe they just deal with it.. let it cut both ways. Just don't fricken fumble. Put the onus on the players. That's football. Edited March 21, 2018 by GrizzReaper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 9 minutes ago, Jay_Fixit said: Did he have possession? Because that’s how you define possession. Not difficult. Do you define it the same as me? What about as ed hochuli? Are refs using the porn vs art standard of “you know it when you see it”? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay_Fixit Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Just now, NoSaint said: Do you define it the same as me? What about as ed hochuli? Are refs using the porn vs art standard of “you know it when you see it”? Yes. 2 feet. Ball is possessed. Catch. If it’s not possessed, it’s not a catch. Until it’s possessed of course. Then it’s a catch. Unless it’s not. Because then it’s not. I mean, I know of easier things to recognize but not many. In fact, I should probably just show up to the NFL offices tomorrow and say “Hi guys, I’m the new rules guy, somebody get me a coffee.” 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzReaper Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Saints mentioned a guy going to the ground then loses the ball. If the guy isn't "down" and he loses the ball I say its a fumble not a completion. IF he clearly is holding the ball in his possession in any way shape or form then yeah fumble. Because if he didn't lose it he would have a completion. Right? Idk it just seems overly complicated to me. Get back to old school football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
What a Tuel Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 A lot of people don't like that WRs catching a ball very briefly and letting go would qualify as a catch, and it would be annoying when it happens. But the alternative is much worse in my opinion. I also like the idea of opening up the receiving game to more fumbles now. Make it a risk to let the ball go after catching it even briefly. Otherwise it just seems sterile with "oh he catches it, and turns, and oh the ball comes out, no catch. Lets stand around and review for 10 minutes" rather than opening it up to the players on the field to recover and make a play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DallasMac Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Guess I'm one of the few ppl that didn't have a problem with the rule the way it was. Just needed to be enforced correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 3 hours ago, NoSaint said: Picture a guy standing. Ball hits his hands and he gets drilled. Ball comes out. How do you define possession? Trick question! You can't hit a defenseless receiver. Penalty on the defense, automatic first down. I agree with many here... If you catch it, with 2 feet/knee down, its a catch. If you drop the ball on the way to to the ground... Its a catch and fumble. If the ball moves in your hands, AFTER you have possession, on the ground, out of bounds, whatever.. Still a catch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 I actually don't think the only problem with the rule is the surviving the ground part. I think the part they get wrong is that the replay evidence has to be clear and convincing in order to overturn the call on the field. Too often, they were having to study the tape forever and to an absurd degree before making a decision. The thing about "clear and convincing" is that it jumps out at you from the git-go. If you have to look at the tape over and over and over, its NOT clear and convincing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rochesterfan Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 6 hours ago, NoSaint said: Lets remember this when some guy going to the ground loses a ball and it’s called a catch still and upsets everyone. In reality it’s a really tough sequence to govern using a couple bullet points. Either you end up making it complex or you give refs a ton of leeway— neither loved by fans Agreed - the rule became more complicated with the increase in HD and camera angles. Years ago you couldn’t tell a slight bobble or see it hit the ground. People will be happy until they are not - because the game is just faster, closer, with more views and more plays on the edge. They will relax the rule and the some guy for NE will be diving in the end zone to make a catch, get both feet down and lose the ball before hitting the ground and it will be ruled a TD and people’s head will explode and we will have 30 threads about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rochesterfan Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 6 hours ago, Jay_Fixit said: Yes. 2 feet. Ball is possessed. Catch. If it’s not possessed, it’s not a catch. Until it’s possessed of course. Then it’s a catch. Unless it’s not. Because then it’s not. I mean, I know of easier things to recognize but not many. In fact, I should probably just show up to the NFL offices tomorrow and say “Hi guys, I’m the new rules guy, somebody get me a coffee.” This is the essence of the Benjamin TD play against NE. When does he get possession- the ball hits his hands but he had no control. The ball comes toward his body and into his arms. When is possession established- the exact moment the ball touches his arms, a 1/2 second later as he tightens the grip because literally that was the difference in the TD. The ball touches his elbow space just as the 2nd foot is coming up off the ground. It is literally a split second and will not be changed by this rule change because possession is key. I think they got it right for KB - for me when he had full possession- he never established 2 feet down, but others see it different. Again 5-10 years ago this was not an issue because the ruling on the field was TD and the camera angles never would of been clear enough to focus in and see the play that clearly from that many angles. The best solution is to go back to 5 cameras at a game and eliminate HD and that would solve many issues, but as that won’t happen they are going to be fighting this issue every time a case presents itself because they are all unique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCOrange Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 So is a slight movement allowed or not allowed with this new rule? The article makes it sound like it is allowed but that was already the case this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Slight movement and going to the ground reverses a number of poor calls and the outcome of 3 games. IIRC 2 of which gave the Pars* a victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmur66 Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 So is a catch a catch again? or not. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterpan Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 8 hours ago, NoSaint said: Do you define it the same as me? What about as ed hochuli? Are refs using the porn vs art standard of “you know it when you see it”? This wasn't an issue untill like 4-5 years ago. I think that catch standards used from 1898-2004 should work fine. PS I think one way to make the catch easier to rule upon AND give the NFL more scoring, which it wants, is to make it only one foot down, like college. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 10 hours ago, GrizzReaper said: It is a dumb rule... If the guy has the ball it's a frickin catch. Why do they have to make it so complicated? Hard to manipulate the outcomes of games with simple rules that everyone can understand and follow. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cba fan Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 (edited) 11 hours ago, RememberTheRockpile said: Look like they are trying to fix stupid. This link does not really explain the going to the ground change. Under the new rule will mean that once the receiver has control of the football, any slight movement in the receiver's hands viewed during a replay review would not be an incompletion. If the receiver is in the process of going to the ground, they will have to maintain control of the football while on the turf for the catch to be ruled as complete. It says going to the ground is going to be eliminated. Then contradicts that by above. Which sounds like old rule. So what has changed besides movement is ok? So player can lose the ball when hitting ground and then grab it again and it is a catch? As long as he is not out of bounds or ball touches ground? And if he loses control it is no catch? What is defined as losing control? It leaves his grip but not his body? Or outside his reach. Or it touches the ground?? IS THIS THE CHANGE ?: Old rule: If receiver goes to the ground in the process of completing the catch he must survive the ground. IE: if diving/flying through air and/or catches it and does not take enough steps to establish himself as a runner as he falls/dives to ground? and ball moves, comes out, or hits the ground while not in control. Incomplete no catch no fumble. New rule: If receiver is in the process of going to the ground he must maintain control when hitting the ground. IE: he is diving/flying through air?? Does not matter if out of bounds or if ball moves? Incomplete? Why do you need to survive the ground? If ball never hits the ground it should be catch.(debatable part is if player is out of bounds then likely incomplete or maybe not: i would let him still catch it even if touching out of bounds after getting 2 feet in. EX: wr catch fall two feet in fall out of bounds to the ground ball bounces up a little or moves player grabs it. catch in my book) another EX: receiver has ball go through his hands as he is diving, WR falls on his stomach, ball hits WR back and bounces up or just sits there, DB catches it in the air or takes it off WR back for a clear INT. YES??.......NO, if new rules are applied that is an incompletion. WR was going to the ground and did not maintain possession while on turf. Incomplete. Another EX: WR dives for catch and is sliding on his back as ball hits his hands for catch, as he is sliding on his back the ball pops up 8 inches and then falls back into his hands. No one is contacting him. Catch rule says that is incomplete. Edited March 21, 2018 by cba fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLTbills Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 10 hours ago, NoSaint said: Picture a guy standing. Ball hits his hands and he gets drilled. Ball comes out. How do you define possession? Should be the way it's always been. did he make a football move? did he take 2 steps and then the ball came out? if so, then it's a catch and a fumble. This was never an issue for as long as the NFL was around until they started messing with it in the last 5 or so years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_In_NH Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 In my opinion you will never really fix the catch rule but you can probably improve it. Catching with possession is a spectrum where on the left is an obvious drop and the right an obvious catch. Somewhere in the middle is a line where something is or is not a catch. Recently the line has been closer to the right where they put a lot of the hones on the receiver to catch it really cleanly. They can move the line to the left but no matter where they move it you will find plays that are so close to the line they are subjective. No matter what the change the rule to, there will be plays fans think were blown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forward Progress Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 10 hours ago, Doc Brown said: I thought this was the rule. "And we’ll go back to the old replay standard of reverse the call on the field only when it’s indisputable.” This was the biggest issue last year. Riveron reversed too many calls without indisputable evidence. It was only a coincidence that 4 of these favoured the Pats leading to 2-3 more victories. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts