mi_keys
13 years ago

That isn't my issue. The ball survived impact, Calvin rolled over and got his butt off the ground before he swung the ball around and hit the ground causing him to lose control of it. He was on his way back up.

That is the issue to me.

The initial impact didn't do anything.

How long after making a catch does the WR have to control the ball in the endzone before the play is over. 3 steps, 4 or mabye 5. What is the cut off. If a WR gets both feet down, gets knocked down by contact, does 3 somersaults, goes out of bounds, hits the goal post, lands on his left side and then drops the ball, is that still the process of the catch? If so, I disagree and it is a stupid interpretation of a good rule. That is a little extreme but if they don't say when the process ends, it never ends.

If the WR established possession by normal criteria before going to the ground, the ground shouldn't cause an incompletion. If he gets both feet in, then steps out of bounds and goes down, it should be a completion. The process should end when possession is established.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



The issue you raise is also my biggest problem with how the rule has developed/been interpreted over the past several years. If I recall correctly the ruling on the Jennings drop was that he was going to the ground because the defender had jumped on him as he was catching the ball. Then again, in week 1 I saw Brandon Marshall make a catch going up with a defender, stumble taking two steps and lose the ball when he hit the ground trying to stretch out for more yardage as he was going down; and no one questioned it. I have yet to see one good, consistently applied definition of what going to ground in the process of making the catch means.

I'm speculating here, but I think this rule gets its roots in a controversial call in the '99 NFC Championship game between the Bucs and Rams: the Bert Emmanuel catch. I'm sure a number of you remember the play, but what looked like and felt like a catch was reviewed and ruled incomplete. It may well have cost Tampa Bay the game; and the rule was changed that offseason. For reference, here is the play:



And what they changed the rule to in 2000:

A receiver has to have possession of the ball and control of the ball. If when making a catch and falling to the ground, the ball is allowed to touch the ground and still be considered a catch if the player maintains clear control of the ball.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_NFL_season 

I think that's where the "must maintain control through the process of the catch when going to the ground" has come from. If that was the original intent, then I think the rule should be stripped back down to how that original play and interpretation would have played out. They should limit it to plays where the receiver has dove to make a catch or something similar, where the catch and collision . They should also clearly define when the process of making a catch while going to the ground has been completed, to eliminate terrible rulings like what they got with Calvin Johnson last year.
Born and bred a cheesehead
beast
13 years ago
Calvin catch was a catch (he just put it down too early)... it's just the NFL wanted to crack down on letting the ball go too soon and he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and the Refs called it and made him the poster boy for the rule.

But it's simple... catch the ball in bounds and hold onto it...

For a TD... catch the ball in bounds, have it in the TD area and hold onto it...

You have to prove possession ether way... if you don't prove possession it's then a drop... it's the same all over the field.

The different is simply where you prove possession... if you prove it before the end zone all you have to do it get the ball into the end zone... if you don't prove possession before the end zone you have to prove possession in the end zone.
UserPostedImage
Dexter_Sinister
13 years ago

Calvin catch was a catch (he just put it down too early)... it's just the NFL wanted to crack down on letting the ball go too soon and he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and the Refs called it and made him the poster boy for the rule.

But it's simple... catch the ball in bounds and hold onto it...

For a TD... catch the ball in bounds, have it in the TD area and hold onto it...

You have to prove possession ether way... if you don't prove possession it's then a drop... it's the same all over the field.

The different is simply where you prove possession... if you prove it before the end zone all you have to do it get the ball into the end zone... if you don't prove possession before the end zone you have to prove possession in the end zone.

Originally Posted by: beast 



How long do they have to hold on to it? What is the magic point in time when the process of making a catch ends you can hit the ground and not cause an incompletion? When does going to the ground end? How long after hitting the ground does that process go?

That is the problem your simple answer doesn't address. In a perfect world, the WR holds on to the ball until after he gets up and hands it to the official. The real world isn't perfect. The rules should explain when those processes start and end. But they are so open ended, that a guy can get both feet down in bounds with control, step on the boundry, take another step, and then land on the ground losing the ball and it is incomplete. Or a guy can make a catch in the end zone, get both feet down, get his butt down, roll over onto his knees and start getting up and lose the completion because the ball squirted out of his grip after he was up on one knee.

Real examples of how poorly this rule is interpreted.

My opinion is that when the receiver controls the ball, gets 2 feet down and makes any move, the process of making a catch is over. What happens after that follows according to a ball carrier with possession. If he falls and hits the ground untouched and loses the ball, it is live. If he is knocked down, the ground can't cause a fumble and he is down by contact.

If a player touches the boundary and is touching the Football, the play is instantly dead. What happens after that is not relevant. If he had control and 2 feet or a knee in bounds the play is dead as soon as he touches the boundary. If he doesn't have control, the play is dead without that player being in possession of the ball.

If a player goes to the ground without establishing possession by the normal rules of 2 feet down and a move, then he has to control the ball and not touch the boundry or let the ball touch the ground out of his control while going to the ground.

As far as the definition of when going to the ground ends, it should be when his downward momentum stops. Even if he bounces and hits the ground a second time causing him to lose the ball. If control survived initial contact with the ground, as long as the player is in the endzone, out of bounds or downed by contact, the catch is completed and play is over. If he is not downed by contact, out ov bounds or in the end zone it is a live ball.

They need clear delineation of when those two processes start and end.


I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
beast
13 years ago

How long do they have to hold on to it? What is the magic point in time when the process of making a catch ends you can hit the ground and not cause an incompletion? When does going to the ground end? How long after hitting the ground does that process go?

That is the problem your simple answer doesn't address.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



Because that answer is football 101... you play till the whistle blows... until the Refs rule the play dead...


UserPostedImage
Dexter_Sinister
13 years ago

Because that answer is football 101... you play till the whistle blows... until the Refs rule the play dead...

Originally Posted by: beast 



Arbitrary then.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
beast
13 years ago

Arbitrary then.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



No and you know that (or should if you know football 101). The Ref is suppose to blow the whistle when the play is over.
UserPostedImage
Dexter_Sinister
13 years ago

No and you know that (or should if you know football 101). The Ref is suppose to blow the whistle when the play is over.

Originally Posted by: beast 


When is the play over? That is the arbitrary part.

The definitions don't state when going to the ground stops. Don't use circular logic and say at the whistle. When is the official supposed to blow the whistle according to the rules? I have seen them do it after the WR takes 2 steps out of bound and then hits the ground.

When does the process of catching a ball end? We need a concrete delineation of when the process of making a catch ends and possession is established. What happens after that should be according to the rules of a ball carrier with possession. Which is not the end of the play.

We also need to have a concrete delineation of when going to the ground ends. Not the arbitrary decision of the official. I think it should be initial impact with the ground. When all downward momentum has stopped. If they roll, bounce or get hit after that, that should be after the play is dead by the rules. Not by the official deciding arbitrarily.

You can't replay an arbitrary decision. You can't even get more than one person to concur on when exactly that point is. But downward momentum stopping is a much more finite point than the process of going to the ground.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
PackerTraxx
13 years ago
As ususal the NFL can't keep anything plain and simple. The interpretation should be the sam in the end zone as the rest of the field. They complicate instant replay even worse.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
longtimefan
13 years ago
Again, if the ground cant cause a fumble in the 100 yards of the field, why is it different in the endzones?
beast
13 years ago
blah blah blah... I'm tired of the whining, complaining and excuses...

hold onto the ball in the end zone and it's a TD... it's simple as that...

UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
dfosterf (9m) : The white background beta was hard to read, especially the quotes
dfosterf (25m) : Hopefully the color scheme remains the same
dfosterf (32m) : *Friday*
dfosterf (35m) : 100 million would be 539 million as of Fridsy
dfosterf (35m) : Heck, they could have taken a hundred milliion and invested in DAVE inc. last year (semi random, humor, but real)
dfosterf (47m) : Beer brat and ticket is where the money comes from
dfosterf (54m) : The 40th is Titletown Tech itself. This is a pet project of both Ed Policy and Mark Murphy
Zero2Cool (55m) : New site coming along nicely. The editor is better than what we have here. Oh yeah!
dfosterf (56m) : No profit that I know of. 0 for 40
dfosterf (59m) : The woke reference has to do with the makeup and oftentimes objectives of the companies they invested in
packerfanoutwest (59m) : beer and brats woke? say whom?
beast (1h) : I don't want to get into politics, but how is, beers and brats considered to be "woke"? Food is food...
beast (1h) : That being said, I'm not saying all 100% should be that way, but not surprised if majority are Wisconsin based
beast (1h) : And if everyone has heard of them, then it it probably has less growth potential and less community based
beast (1h) : Well isn't the investing person supposed to invest the money?
dfosterf (1h) : I swear if I were to discover that one of them has invented a virtue signalling transmitter I will not be surprised, lol
dfosterf (1h) : 39 companies so far that I bet no one has ever heard of.
dfosterf (1h) : -Not saying woke, but should- borderline philanthopist venture capital excercise
dfosterf (1h) : Well for one, they are pouring resources into Title Town Tech. Investing beer, brat, hot dog, ticket money into what is pretty much...
beast (8h) : Wow, 95% drop in investment revenue? Would be interesting to hear the details of why...
dfosterf (25-Jul) : It's my one day deal complaint dept. on shareholder meeting day
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Probably a homer access credential intimidation kinda thing
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Meathead "journalists" skip this, concentrating on operational revenue when convenient. They switch when net revenue is more favorable.
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Resulting in an actual drop of net revenue of 12.5%. She is from Minnesota. Just sayin'
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Any plans to hold Maureen Smith (CFO) accountable for a 95% drop in investment revenue?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : In your face, HBO!
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @ByRyanWood Mark Murphy: “A great source of pride of mine is that we were never on Hard Knocks.”
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : *years
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @mattschneidman Mark Murphy says he anticipates “many Packers games” being played in Germany, Ireland and/or the U.K. over the next 5-10 yea
dfosterf (25-Jul) : *cafeteria* I have hit my head also, so I sympathize
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Possibly hit his head leaning into the glass protecting the food in the cafateria
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Maybe a low flying drone
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Did Savion Williams run into a goalpost or something?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : also, no bueno when a guy starts getting concussions right off the bat in his career
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Concussion is worse. Banks probably vet off day via back booboo claim
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @AndyHermanNFL Jordy Nelson out at camp today. No word if he’s in play for one of the two open roster spots ; )
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Is that better or worse than Banks bad back?
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Savion concussion ... not good.
packerfanoutwest (24-Jul) : Aaron Rodgers’s first pass of first team period was picked off
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : tbh I didn't hear of his passing
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Cosby Show. Malcom Jamal Warner I think is real name
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : I was thinking of Ozzy and Hulk
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : Who's Theo?
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : How is Theo alliteration?
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : Bad week for people whose names are alliterations
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Hulk Hogan gone too.
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Oh, it's toe injury
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Hope it's not serious. that would stink
dfosterf (24-Jul) : Sounds like an ankle not a knee for Fields
dfosterf (24-Jul) : Ya Flaccp on Browns
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jul / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

25-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

24-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

22-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.