The "ball did not survive the ground" rule

[Buffalo_Stampede]

2 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

Poyer had 3 feet down. The 3rd step counts as a football move. Once that 3rd step is made, surviving the ground doesn’t exist.

 

See: https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/244127-the-ball-did-not-survive-the-ground-rule/?do=findComment&comment=8088395

 

Not only that he tucks the football away.

 

1 minute ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

 

A toe tap like that is not "an additional step". It would count towards part b of the catch rule, but not part c

He tucks the ball.

Edited December 2, 2022 by Buffalo_Stampede

[Simstim]

Just now, ArtVandalay said:

Lmao the ball flipped around on his chest, in no way did he have control of that thing. It wasn't even close. 

 

What is silly about asking a player to hold on to the football? I swear you guys are being ridiculous with this. If this was against us you would be slamming the table no way he caught it. 

I guess we see things in different ways. I saw a small amount of movement where he had his hands on the ball the whole time.

 

You saw it flopping round his chest.

 

All about perception.

 

And FWIW, it's not really about it being a Bill. It just felt and looked like a catch, and it is incredibly irksome when what you see doesn't match what is called.

 

 

[Shemp]

My heart skipped half a beat on that Gabe Davis TD. He caught it and fell to the ground. The football appeared to be on the ground (again) when he fell on it. When players catch the ball while falling or on their way to a fall, they have to roll on their back so they don't put the ball on the ground.

Edited December 2, 2022 by Blah Blah

[Einstein]

2 minutes ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

 

A toe tap like that is not "an additional step". It would count towards part b of the catch rule, but not part c

 

Literally no where in the rule book does it say that a toe tap is not an additional step. You’re just making that up.

[Realist]

47 minutes ago, nkreed said:

He had three feet in on the play with a tuck before he is OOB. I think it was a terrible enforcement of going to the ground. That third step with possession and tuck should have constituted a football move.

I don't mind the ground rule, however, for this particular catch, I think having that third foot hit in bounds should constitute a football move. It's basically another step after the catch.

[BuffaloRebound]

It was the right call the way the rule has been interpreted but he lost control outside the white Out-of-Bounds line.  That should be considered out of the field of play and be an exception to the going to the ground rule.  He clearly had control up until that point.  

[Einstein]

30 minutes ago, nkreed said:

There's a belief that the surviving the ground doesn't come into effect in this situation, since he has clearly passed the three rules of control, body, and football move prior to being OOB.

 

Not just a belief. it’s literally IN the rule book. Surviving the ground doesn’t take effect if a third step is taken.

 

 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

Reading the rules just confused even more. The rule even states the ball can move when hit the ground.

 

I give up. 

[DabillsDaBillsDaBills]

5 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

Literally no where in the rule book does it say that a toe tap is not an additional step. You’re just making that up.

 

It's basic English right?

 

If the rulebook literally says you need to take a "step" I think you would need to take an actual step and not just tap your toe. 

 

 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

1 minute ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

 

It's basic English right?

 

If the rulebook literally says you need to take a "step" I think you would need to take an actual step and not just tap your toe. 

 

 

It says tucking the ball also, which he does. Also the Saints player does in the video I posted earlier.

 

 

[Einstein]

9 minutes ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

 

It's basic English right?

 

If the rulebook literally says you need to take a "step" I think you would need to take an actual step and not just tap your toe. 

 

 

 

Uh, If you’re going by basic english, “step” is just putting one leg in front of the other, which Poyer also did a third time.

 

A toe tap has always been considered a step by the NFL. Thus why toe tap catches count. A 3rd toe tap, a hand down, an elbow down, even a SHIN or ankle on the ground, counts as a catch. 

 

Also, saw this in a PFT article on a different topic but shows the leagues thinking: “the league interprets the rule to mean that a toe is a foot, as long as the toe is dragged”

 

To the NFL, a toe tap is a step.

 

 

Edited December 2, 2022 by Einstein

[Brand J]

2 minutes ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

 

It's basic English right?

 

If the rulebook literally says you need to take a "step" I think you would need to take an actual step and not just tap your toe. 

 

 

A toe tap equals a step when determining possession of the ball.

[nkreed]

14 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

That might be, but he clearly gets 2 feet down and that action causes him to fall - therefore the way they teach it is no matter how many body parts or tucking action occurs - he still must maintain the control.

 

If all of that had occurred 3 more feet in bounds and he flew as he did - got both feet down and continue to fall - his knee, hip, and shoulder all landed in bounds, but his head hit OOB and the ball moved - possession would have been established after his head hit OOB and it would still be incomplete.

 

The reason I say be careful is because any rule change where tucking might be considered a football action could have unseen consequences- such as a WR diving for a catch in bounds - gets hands on the ball and 2 feet down.   As he is falling he tucks the ball and it comes loose  as he hits the ground - based upon your new definition- that would be a catch and a fumble with the potential for a huge turnover.

 

 

I think the difference here is that Poyer established control and possession with 3 feet and a tuck. In essence, after he controlled the ball he tucked AND got a third foot down.

 

It's a bang bang play, but imo he clearly possesses the ball inbounds and establishes himself with the third foot. OOB actions don't matter at that point. 

[T master]

1 hour ago, Repulsif said:

Being around since 2002, I guess this is my 1st topic.

 

After seing the Poyer INT canceled, I really thought this rule is wrong (and prone to official/Vegas conspiracy)

For me, since/when the player has 2 feet in ground, don't juggle the ball while falling, it's a catch/int...

Runners don't have this rule

Should be the same thing whenever you run it or catch it

 

Am I the only one to think this ?

Could someone explain to me the difference ?

 

This rule has always sucked !! What ever happened to the ground can't cause a fumble ? 

 

Poyer had control when he hit the ground i immediately thought that was a BS call ! If you have the ball when you hit the ground your down right ? 

 

Then when these guys reach out to hit the pylon with the ball for a TD and after they cross to goal line & hit the ground & the ball comes out its still a TD stalk about a double standard it should be if you have the ball when you hit the ground your down at that point besides Poyer had the ball all the way while on the ground .

 

Total BS call !! 

[Einstein]

4 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:

A toe tap equals a step when determining possession of the ball.

 

Yep.

 

This article is about a different topic but it mentions that the league considers a toe to be a full foot.

 

”the league interprets the rule to mean that a toe is a foot, as long as the toe is dragged”

[Buffalo_Stampede]

I’m so confused. ABC.

 

A - Secure the ball.

 

B - 2 feet or body part in bounds 

 

C - 3rd step, tuck the ball, or reach the ball. OR survive the ground. 
 

I always thought the rule was ABC and survive the ground.

 

One of the most controversial incompletions is the Steelers TE. By rule that’s a catch. 
 

 

[DabillsDaBillsDaBills]

3 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

Uh, If you’re going by basic english, “step” is just putting one leg in front of the other, which Poyer also did a third time.

 

A toe tap has always been considered a step by the NFL. Thus why toe tap catches count. A 3rd toe tap, a hand down, an elbow down, even a SHIN or ankle on the ground, counts as a catch. 

 

 

As I said in my first post, a toe tap counts towards part B of the rule. 

 

b. touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

 

Note that they use "both feet" and not "step".  

 

Part C is a separate part of the rule and clearly says "step"

 

c. after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so. 

 

I don't think any reasonable person is going to consider Poyer tapping his toe down for a fraction of a second while falling to the ground to be a "step". 

[Thurman#1]

27 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

But he had 2 feet down and possession in bounds.  Once he went out of bounds, the play should be over. Same as a fumble in bounds that goes out of bounds.  NFL makes up rules as they go it seems and makes them way more complicated and convoluted than they need to be.

 

 

You might think he had possession in bounds. According to the rules, he didn't satisfy the requirements for that from what I see.

 

There are two rules involved:

 

Item 3: Possession of Loose Ball. To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted, or recovered, a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet or any other part of his boty, other than his hands, completely on the ground inbounds, and maintain control of the ball long enough to perform any act common to the game. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground, there is no possession.

 

Note 2: If a player goes to the ground out of bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, or there is no possession.

 

Your foot hit the ground a third time inbounds as you fall, IMO, does not fit the "act common to the game" idea. It's not juking, changing direction, reaching the ball forward towards an area that would reward him in the context of the game or whatever. It's just part of falling, generally.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

Just now, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

 

As I said in my first post, a toe tap counts towards part B of the rule. 

 

b. touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

 

Note that they use "both feet" and not "step".  

 

Part C is a separate part of the rule and clearly says "step"

 

c. after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so. 

 

I don't think any reasonable person is going to consider Poyer tapping his toe down for a fraction of a second while falling to the ground to be a "step". 

He tucked the ball. Forget he step argument.

[NoSaint]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

I could not agree more. Think of it another way. When a receiver catches a ball in bounds and does NOT hit the ground, but instead releases it because he is now off the field of play, is it not a catch?  Of course it is. That was a really dumb call. The league needs to change that.

then running with it is the football move to complete possession

 

 in poyers case, surviving the fall is the football move. Unfortunately being out of bounds as soon as it’s loose he’s dead and the balls dead.

 

The only real argument would be if a toe tap after the catch is a football move

Edited December 2, 2022 by NoSaint