News: ESPN: NFL owners OK new catch rule by 32-0 vote

[Reality]

NFL owners OK new catch rule by 32-0 vote

NFL owners Tuesday unanimously approved a new catch rule, which establishes three elements of a catch: control, in bounds and a "football move."

Read Full Story

 

[ShortRound]

Profanity filter save me

 

[Jipper]

so when do the cowboys get their 2014 superbowl rings?

 

[Kevinicus]

So...it's what it was before the Dez call? Or did they get rid of the going to the ground part completely, which will now eliminate sideline catches?

Will wait for the language...

 

[John813]

L O L

Leave it to a game between Pittsburgh and New England for changes to be made.

 

[viman96]

"The current proposal will ensure that controversial incompletions -- such as Calvin Johnson's infamous play in 2010 and Dez Bryant's in 2014 -- will instead be ruled completions in the future."

 

[DFWJC]

Common sense.
Of course it was a catch...plain and simple, clear as day, etc
robbed

 

[loublue22]

Duh, easiest change ever

Reaching for the line to gain = possession

 

[gimmesix]

Wasn't the whole contention with Bryant that he did not make a football move? Isn't that what those who have been arguing that it wasn't a catch have been saying?

The league seems to be saying it would have been a catch because he got two feet down, maintained control and made a football move, but under the rule in place at the time, those things would have made it a catch. That's why Blandino and his cronies tried to dismiss Dez making a football move.

Maybe I'm missing something in this. I know they wanted to take away the part of maintaining control through the process of hitting the ground, but it seems to me that the things they are saying will make catches like Dez's a catch are the same things in place that should have made it a catch then. He had to get two feet down, have control and make a football move in order for the ground not to have mattered. Now, he has to get two feet down, have control and make a football move and the ground no longer matters.

 

[Bleedblue1111]

Duh, easiest change ever

Reaching for the line to gain = possession

Does it say anything in regard to a "partial reach" or "not enough of a reach?"

 

[charron]

Wasn't the whole contention with Bryant that he did not make a football move? Isn't that what those who have been arguing that it wasn't a catch have been saying?

The league seems to be saying it would have been a catch because he got two feet down, maintained control and made a football move, but under the rule in place at the time, those things would have made it a catch. That's why Blandino and his cronies tried to dismiss Dez making a football move.

Maybe I'm missing something in this. I know they wanted to take away the part of maintaining control through the process of hitting the ground, but it seems to me that the things they are saying will make catches like Dez's a catch are the same things in place that should have made it a catch then. He had to get two feet down, have control and make a football move in order for the ground not to have mattered. Now, he has to get two feet down, have control and make a football move and the ground no longer matters.

They said he didn't have control because he moved the ball from 1 hand to another and then stretched out his arm to score.

Now they can rule it a catch and then use running back rules once the catch is established.

 

[Kevinicus]

Wasn't the whole contention with Bryant that he did not make a football move? Isn't that what those who have been arguing that it wasn't a catch have been saying?

The league seems to be saying it would have been a catch because he got two feet down, maintained control and made a football move, but under the rule in place at the time, those things would have made it a catch. That's why Blandino and his cronies tried to dismiss Dez making a football move.

Maybe I'm missing something in this. I know they wanted to take away the part of maintaining control through the process of hitting the ground, but it seems to me that the things they are saying will make catches like Dez's a catch are the same things in place that should have made it a catch then. He had to get two feet down, have control and make a football move in order for the ground not to have mattered. Now, he has to get two feet down, have control and make a football move and the ground no longer matters.

I bet they screwed things up again, and now diving catches out of bounds when a guy drags his feet but can't make a football move will be incomplete by rule.

 

[phildadon86]

Does it say anything in regard to a "partial reach" or "not enough of a reach?"

No that's only people on this board who don't want to admit they literally have no idea what a catch is either.

 

[KJJ]

So...it's what it was before the Dez call? Or did they get rid of the going to the ground part completely, which will now eliminate sideline catches?

Will wait for the language...

Where have you been? They got rid of the going to the ground part of the rule, read the article. On sideline catches the receiver has to have both feet in bounds and control of the ball. If they’re going to the ground and lose the ball it’s still a catch.

 

[CowboyChris]

I bet they screwed things up again, and now diving catches out of bounds when a guy drags his feet but can't make a football move will be incomplete by rule.

that's always been incomplete

 

[acr731]

L O L

Leave it to a game between Pittsburgh and New England for changes to be made.

The change would have come much sooner had it happened to the Giants.

 

[bigdnlaca]

I think there will be an issue and the next rule will be that the ground can cause a fumble if the player isn't a ball carrier.
It is going to be too many players catching the ball, get tackled/wraped one full second later without doing a football move, and going down to the ground with the football popping out afterwards.
I have a feeling the refs will call that a catch instead of incomplete.

 

[KJJ]

L O L

Leave it to a game between Pittsburgh and New England for changes to be made.

It’s been a number of plays that led to the change. The Jesse James play and the Ertz play finally pushed the league over the edge where everyone agreed enough was enough. The rule was too confusing to everyone and was causing too much controversy and they changed it.

 

[vlad]

I don't know why it just can't be two feet and the ground can't cause a fumble. So if they have a control of it or they switch hands under control, don't juggle, bobble it, etc...seems pretty straight forward. All this football move stuff...come on.

 

[gimmesix]

They said he didn't have control because he moved the ball from 1 hand to another and then stretched out his arm to score.

Now they can rule it a catch and then use running back rules once the catch is established.

But wouldn't he still not have established control in that case? It has to be two feet down, control and a football move to be a catch.

Seems to me that officials before were only really paying attention to whether receivers maintained control after hitting the ground. That was never supposed to be the rule. It was only the rule if they did not get two feet down, have control and make a football move.

The best thing about the rule change is that it forces officials to focus on those other things. But if the league is saying Dez's catch would have been a catch under the "new" rule of two feet down, control and football move then he met all the criteria for it to be a catch then, which nullifies going to the ground.

Blandino's excuse was that he did not make a move common to the game (football move), but the league is essentially acknowledging that he did.

Anyway, I'm not going to get back into all that. It just seems to me that if the league is saying those things would have made it a catch, then it's basically admitting that what Blandino and the officials were wrong in what they said happened (whether it was lack of control or not making a football move).