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

[glimmerman]

It was a catch then and apparently now it’s really a catch.

 

[blindzebra]

If the player is going to the ground and had not completed the 3 step process prior, they must maintain possession.

NO football move can complete the process while falling.

A time element which was defined as brace/reagain balance plus a lunge could satisfy as an act that would have completed the process.

Removing the going to the ground rule now means a football move CAN complete the process while a player is falling.

This is 100% incorrect and created to explain away case plays that clearly say completing the catch process ends going to the ground.

 

[blindzebra]

It is by far the most lenient catch rule we have ever had.

There will be many judgment calls now, especially with the "time enough to do so".

I still want to see exactly how the rule is written.

So upright long enough was black and white, huh?

 

[blindzebra]

FYI,
Going to the ground still exists in the new rule.

A player who has not made a football act that hits the ground still needs to maintain control of the ball. The difference now is that it is not going to be used in a way it was never intended to be used, to trump the catch process.

 

[MarcusRock]

No, you'll dodge the questions because you understand the conclusion.

If you say Dez did not do any one of those things, then you're saying his catch would not be a catch under the new rule because it also requires two feet down, control and a football move. You cannot say that because the league is saying it would have been a catch under the new rule.

If you say Dez did all three of those things, then you are acknowledging the he completed the process of the catch before going to the ground, which is the requirement of the rule. The ground only matters if the process of the catch is not completed before the player hits the turf.

I get it though. This is your thing and you're never going to give it up and admit you're wrong.

Dodge? I never dodge. That's what catch theorists do when I ask a Kryptonite question. Again, you give all sorts of scenarios without addressing the Going to the Ground Rule which I've mentioned to you no less than 3 times, is mentioned in the lead article, and is in the Steratore quote you posted. As I said, catch theorists have to avoid talking about the going to the ground rule because it destroys their argument on the spot. So then they have to go on all sorts of tangents and boondoggles to divert.

But just so you know your premise is a road to nowhere, the answers to your questions were yes, yes, no. And that is why the going to the ground rule applied then and its rules took precedence in requiring that Dez maintain possession throughout contacting the ground. That requirement is relaxed now which is why it would be a catch today but not then.

 

[OmerV]

I'll be curious to see the wording, but my guess is it still won't be clear exactly what a "football move" is, and there will still be interpretation. I suspect the biggest change wont be in writing, but in the instruction to the refs on how to interpret the rule, which I assume will be to give much more of the benefit of the doubt to the receiver. That will make offensive teams happy who will see catches that might have been called incomplete in the past now called complete, although they may not be happy when a player fumbles a ball and loses possession on a play that previously would have been called incomplete. Of course, it will upset defenses who will give up big plays sometimes on passes they feel the receiver shouldn't have been given a completion on. Bottom line is you can't please everyone, and there will always be controversy.

 

[blindzebra]

I'll be curious to see the wording, but my guess is it still won't be clear exactly what a "football move" is, and there will still be interpretation. I suspect the biggest change wont be in writing, but in the instruction to the refs on how to interpret the rule, which I assume will be to give much more of the benefit of the doubt to the receiver. That will make offensive teams happy who will see catches that might have been called incomplete in the past now called complete, although they may not be happy when a player fumbles a ball and loses possession on a play that previously would have been called incomplete. Of course, it will upset defenses who will give up big plays sometimes on passes they feel the receiver shouldn't have been given a completion on. Bottom line is you can't please everyone, and there will always be controversy.

I am not buying this increased fumble stuff. How many times have we seen plays where a player completed the catch process while going to the ground without contact in the field of play? Dez play, nope. The Johnson and James plays involved breaking the plain of the goal line, so nope?

 

[Hoofbite]

Yes, you're missing that the going to the ground rule mandated control throughout contacting the ground. Once replay showed that the ball hit the ground and then the ball came out of his possession for a second, that is what overturned Dez' catch. Now that they've taken the GTTG mandate away, depending on the language, Dez' play would now be a fumble that Dez recovered himself.

Wouldn’t be a fumble, just end of play.

 

[OmerV]

I am not buying this increased fumble stuff. How many times have we seen plays where a player completed the catch process while going to the ground without contact in the field of play? Dez play, nope. The Johnson and James plays involved breaking the plain of the goal line, so nope?

I'm not saying there will be a dramatic influx of it, but there really isn't a dramatic number of Dez like plays either. Many incidents get noticed because of the impact on a game more so than the frequency. When this kind of fumble occurs at a key point in an important game, you can bet on people complaining.

 

[OmerV]

Wouldn’t be a fumble, just end of play.

I believe this would be right since Dez was touched on the way to the ground.

 

[MarcusRock]

Wouldn’t be a fumble, just end of play.

True. Like OmerV said, he was touched.

 

[Beast_from_East]

I'm not sure this solves the problem. If I read right, what they are saying is that there is no longer a need to maintain possession all the way through the play if the 3 elements are met before the player goes to the ground, but wasn't that the case before? The necessity for a "football move" is still in the rule, and that's really the source of the controversy.

The way I read it is that you have to have three parts for a catch
1. possession of the ball
2. two feet down
3. A move common to the game.........such as a 3rd step, reaching for the line of gain, ect....

What they removed was the requirement that a WR must "survive the ground" by maintaining possession if he goes to the ground.

So, in essence, Calvin Johnson play, Dez play, and Jesse James play would all be ruled catches under this new rule since all of them completed the first 3 requirements, just didn't maintain possession going to the ground, but that doesn't matter anymore.

 

[DogFace]

Wrong. It would be a catch now because the Going to the Ground requirement to maintain possession through contacting the ground goes away. Read Steratore's quote again if you won't believe me.

Just so everyone knows this guy is a true troll. He already was forced to admit that you could complete the three part process while going to the ground. He had no choice.

So he switched his silly argument to something about how the rule never changed. Yes. I know it sounds idiotic, but that’s what he did.

This is Dean Blandino after a near catch by Johnson that he said would’ve been a catch if he could’ve gotten two feet down prior to the reach. Note the line “going to the ground in the process of making the catch”—

Blandino:
“This is something we’ve worked really hard at to educate people, in terms of the catch process.”


“Let’s look at the play from week one, the Minn. Det. Game where Calvin is GOING TO THE GROUND in the PROCESS of MAKING THE CATCH.

The process of the catch is a 3 part process-control, 2 feet down, and then have the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game. If you can perform all 3 parts, in that order, you HAVE a catch. If not AND you’re GOING TO THE GROUND you must control the ball when you hit the ground. Watch what happens when Calvin hits the ground, the ball comes loose. He did not have BOTH FEET DOWN prior to THE REACH for the goaline SO this is all one process. This is an incomplete pass.


That’s a calvin catch from 2013. He was not upright as long as Dez. Not at all.

 

[gimmesix]

Dodge? I never dodge. That's what catch theorists do when I ask a Kryptonite question. Again, you give all sorts of scenarios without addressing the Going to the Ground Rule which I've mentioned to you no less than 3 times, is mentioned in the lead article, and is in the Steratore quote you posted. As I said, catch theorists have to avoid talking about the going to the ground rule because it destroys their argument on the spot. So then they have to go on all sorts of tangents and boondoggles to divert.

But just so you know your premise is a road to nowhere, the answers to your questions were yes, yes, no. And that is why the going to the ground rule applied then and its rules took precedence in requiring that Dez maintain possession throughout contacting the ground. That requirement is relaxed now which is why it would be a catch today but not then.

I answered the going to the ground rule, but you can't hear it. The rule states that if the receiver has not completed the requirements of a catch (two feet down, control, football move or establishing himself as a runner), then he has to maintain control of the ball when he goes to the ground. The part you seem to keep conveniently overlooking is that going to the ground ONLY matters if the receiver does not complete the process of the catch.

Your answers to my questions show that you do not believe that Dez completed the process of the catch, which is your opinion, while the league is saying it does because it has said his catch would be a catch under the new rules (two feet down, control, football move). It's fairly simple.

What the league has done is removed the going to the ground component because officials were allowing that to trump the process of the catch, which is not what the rule tells them to do. The Dez, Johnson and James catches being used as examples show this. The NFL is saying the process of the catch was completed in all three of those cases (because they would be catches under the new rule, which has the same requirements for the process of a catch).

 

[diefree666]

it should be control of the ball and two feet inbounds. Dump all this BS 'football move'

that stupidity was even pushed when the catch was made in the End Zone. What move matters when you have already scored?

 

[aria]

so when do the cowboys get their 2014 superbowl rings?

Whenever they can stop Aarron Rodgers. So in other words, no time soon.

 

[DogFace]

I answered the going to the ground rule, but you can't hear it. The rule states that if the receiver has not completed the requirements of a catch (two feet down, control, football move or establishing himself as a runner), then he has to maintain control of the ball when he goes to the ground. The part you seem to keep conveniently overlooking is that going to the ground ONLY matters if the receiver does not complete the process of the catch.

Your answers to my questions show that you do not believe that Dez completed the process of the catch, which is your opinion, while the league is saying it does because it has said his catch would be a catch under the new rules (two feet down, control, football move). It's fairly simple.

What the league has done is removed the going to the ground component because officials were allowing that to trump the process of the catch, which is not what the rule tells them to do. The Dez, Johnson and James catches being used as examples show this. The NFL is saying the process of the catch was completed in all three of those cases (because they would be catches under the new rule, which has the same requirements for the process of a catch).

Get ready for the discussion to shift. You’ll get random articles saying it wasn’t a catch and a moronic stance that the rule didn’t change after 2014.

He’ll also be every rude. If you get rude back he’ll cry to the admins. I sent him direct message no one could see. He tattled like a school girl anyway.

 

[gimmesix]

The way I read it is that you have to have three parts for a catch
1. possession of the ball
2. two feet down
3. A move common to the game.........such as a 3rd step, reaching for the line of gain, ect....

What they removed was the requirement that a WR must "survive the ground" by maintaining possession if he goes to the ground.

So, in essence, Calvin Johnson play, Dez play, and Jesse James play would all be ruled catches under this new rule since all of them completed the first 3 requirements, just didn't maintain possession going to the ground, but that doesn't matter anymore.

That's exactly what they are saying, but going to the ground shouldn't have mattered anyway if they had completed the process of a catch. Going to the ground only was supposed to matter if the process of catch wasn't completed, which is why Steratore said Dez did not make a move common to the game. Blandino said the same thing.

Again, here's what he said:

"Is Bryant going to the ground to make the catch?" Blandino said. "It’s clear. He’s stumbling ... Then we have to look to see, does the ball touch the ground? Which it clearly did, and it came loose after it touched the ground ... The last part which was discussed is did he make a football move? ... Looking at it, he didn’t."

So in Blandino's interpretation, Dez did not make a football move. If he didn't make a football move, then it would not be a catch under the new rule, either. The league, though, says it would be a catch under the new rule, which means it meets the three-point criteria so Blandino and Steratore were wrong.

I think essentially why the league is saying it would be a catch is that they know Blandino or Steratore's interpretation of a football move was faulty. Johnson made a football move, Dez made a football move, James made a football move. If it looks like a catch, it needs to be called a catch.

 

[blindzebra]

The way I read it is that you have to have three parts for a catch
1. possession of the ball
2. two feet down
3. A move common to the game.........such as a 3rd step, reaching for the line of gain, ect....

What they removed was the requirement that a WR must "survive the ground" by maintaining possession if he goes to the ground.

So, in essence, Calvin Johnson play, Dez play, and Jesse James play would all be ruled catches under this new rule since all of them completed the first 3 requirements, just didn't maintain possession going to the ground, but that doesn't matter anymore.

It didn't matter before 2015 either.

 

[BlindFaith]

I answered the going to the ground rule, but you can't hear it. The rule states that if the receiver has not completed the requirements of a catch (two feet down, control, football move or establishing himself as a runner), then he has to maintain control of the ball when he goes to the ground. The part you seem to keep conveniently overlooking is that going to the ground ONLY matters if the receiver does not complete the process of the catch.

Your answers to my questions show that you do not believe that Dez completed the process of the catch, which is your opinion, while the league is saying it does because it has said his catch would be a catch under the new rules (two feet down, control, football move). It's fairly simple.

What the league has done is removed the going to the ground component because officials were allowing that to trump the process of the catch, which is not what the rule tells them to do. The Dez, Johnson and James catches being used as examples show this. The NFL is saying the process of the catch was completed in all three of those cases (because they would be catches under the new rule, which has the same requirements for the process of a catch).

That's NOT what it says.

It says if a player is going to the ground while completing the catch process.

While completing the catch process.

If the player starts to go to the ground before they have completed the catch process.

It does NOT mean that as long as they completed the process before contacting the ground.

Going to the moon does not mean landing on the moon.

This is exactly why they have removed the going to the ground rule. And exactly why Dez did not catch it per the rule.