I do not see any difference between that play and the Dez play in 2014 *merged*

[percyhoward]

You're missing my point. I'm quoting where catch theorists are using 2016 rule language interchangeably while also trying to claim that they're different rules with the words "upright" or "upright long enough." They're the same rule. They updated the language to try to clarify the rule because it was "too hard to understand" for some.

They completely changed the standard for establishing yourself as a runner. As a result, it was totally up to the judgment of the official as to how upright was upright enough, and how long was long enough.

I'm probably a "catch theorist," so are you under the impression that there's some inconsistency with which I refer to rules from different seasons? I'll be glad to clear it up, if so.

 

[OmerV]

They completely changed the standard for establishing yourself as a runner. As a result, it was totally up to the judgment of the official as to how upright was upright enough, and how long was long enough.

I'm probably a "catch theorist," so are you under the impression that there's some inconsistency with which I refer to rules from different seasons? I'll be glad to clear it up, if so.

There was a provision for "going to the ground" in the rules then as well.

 

[G2]

The only time Dez was upright was when he jumped for the ball. As soon as his 1st foot hit his momentum carried him to the ground.

 

[OmerV]

Because he completed the time element needed to satisfy the rule. As it says. He got his second foot down and was “still in control of the ball”. “Still” in control vs losing control implies the time needed to satisfy the time element was met. Just as Dez moving the ball from his shoulder to two hands then to one while his second and third foot landed satisfied the time element required.

The thing is the example you are quoting indicates that there was no "going to the ground" prior to being hit, whereas Dez was going to the ground all the way. From the time his first foot landed he was stumbling on his way to the ground.

 

[nathanlt]

The only time Dez was upright was when he jumped for the ball. As soon as his 1st foot hit his momentum carried him to the ground.

And yet, when his first foot hit, the process of going to the ground was COMPLETE.

Or is there a written definition otherwise? Nope!

 

[blindzebra]

The thing is the example you are quoting indicates that there was no "going to the ground" prior to being hit, whereas Dez was going to the ground all the way. From the time his first foot landed he was stumbling on his way to the ground.

That did not matter.

Here is the casebook play that was in affect for the 2014 season:


A.R. 8.12 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. He goes to the ground as a result of the contact, gets his second foot down, and with the ball in his right arm, he braces himself at the three-yard line with his left hand and simultaneously lunges forward toward the goal line. When he lands in the end zone, the ball comes out. Ruling: Touchdown Team A. Kickoff A35. The pass is complete. When the receiver hits the ground in the end zone, it is the result of lunging forward after bracing himself at the three-yard line and is not part of the process of the catch. Since the ball crossed the goal line, it is a touchdown. If the ball is short of the goal line, it is a catch, and A2 is down by contact.

In 2014 the catch process continues during going to the ground.

They got it wrong and in 2015 Blandino and company claimed to clarify the rule, when in fact they completely changed it to make the rule fit the Dez play. Read the rule from 2012-2014 and then compare it to 2015 and beyond. In 2012-2014 the two feet, control, and act common to the game could be completed at any point prior to contacting the ground, after they blew the Dez play, the act common to the game became upright long enough, which made going to the ground an even bigger part of the game because it required even more subjective decisions by officials. To simplify this from the onset of going to the ground until 2015, if you have control, get two feet down, and then do any act common to playing football, going to the ground ends and you have a catch. From 2015 you have to have control, two feet, and become a runner BEFORE you go to the ground. It became a brand new rule and not a clarification.

 

[blindzebra]

And for those who like to dismiss facts based on why some think it happened, it is two separate things.

They got it wrong and the facts that they did have been presented multiple times in this thread.

Why they did is another discussion, but that in no way changes the fact that they ruled incorrectly on the Dez play.

 

[Hoofbite]

Because he completed the time element needed to satisfy the rule. As it says. He got his second foot down and was “still in control of the ball”. “Still” in control vs losing control implies the time needed to satisfy the time element was met. Just as Dez moving the ball from his shoulder to two hands then to one while his second and third foot landed satisfied the time element required.

Just for clarification sake, the time element does not take into consideration the other 2 prerequisites of a catch.

a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

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

c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.)
​

Control with 2 feet doesn't satisfy the time requirement because the element of time must occur after control with and a 2nd foot.

From the perspective of satisfying the element of time, whatever magical stopwatch the NFL would use would begin after his 2nd foot.

 

[OmerV]

That did not matter.

Here is the casebook play that was in affect for the 2014 season:


A.R. 8.12 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. He goes to the ground as a result of the contact, gets his second foot down, and with the ball in his right arm, he braces himself at the three-yard line with his left hand and simultaneously lunges forward toward the goal line. When he lands in the end zone, the ball comes out. Ruling: Touchdown Team A. Kickoff A35. The pass is complete. When the receiver hits the ground in the end zone, it is the result of lunging forward after bracing himself at the three-yard line and is not part of the process of the catch. Since the ball crossed the goal line, it is a touchdown. If the ball is short of the goal line, it is a catch, and A2 is down by contact.

In 2014 the catch process continues during going to the ground.

They got it wrong and in 2015 Blandino and company claimed to clarify the rule, when in fact they completely changed it to make the rule fit the Dez play. Read the rule from 2012-2014 and then compare it to 2015 and beyond. In 2012-2014 the two feet, control, and act common to the game could be completed at any point prior to contacting the ground, after they blew the Dez play, the act common to the game became upright long enough, which made going to the ground an even bigger part of the game because it required even more subjective decisions by officials. To simplify this from the onset of going to the ground until 2015, if you have control, get two feet down, and then do any act common to playing football, going to the ground ends and you have a catch. From 2015 you have to have control, two feet, and become a runner BEFORE you go to the ground. It became a brand new rule and not a clarification.

It's interesting that the AR# you are citing for this is different than the one Percy has cited. My bet is you have the right one, but I still haven't been able to find the 2014 casebook. Can you provide a link so I can get myself up to speed on that part of the story? Percey hasn't been able to help me out with that.

In any case, the casebook rule you are citing talks about the receiver only going to the ground because of contact after the first foot was down, and Dez was never not going to the ground.

 

[Hoofbite]

That did not matter.

Here is the casebook play that was in affect for the 2014 season:

A.R. 8.12 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. He goes to the ground as a result of the contact, gets his second foot down, and with the ball in his right arm, he braces himself at the three-yard line with his left hand and simultaneously lunges forward toward the goal line. When he lands in the end zone, the ball comes out. Ruling: Touchdown Team A. Kickoff A35. The pass is complete. When the receiver hits the ground in the end zone, it is the result of lunging forward after bracing himself at the three-yard line and is not part of the process of the catch. Since the ball crossed the goal line, it is a touchdown. If the ball is short of the goal line, it is a catch, and A2 is down by contact.

In 2014 the catch process continues during going to the ground.

They got it wrong and in 2015 Blandino and company claimed to clarify the rule, when in fact they completely changed it to make the rule fit the Dez play. Read the rule from 2012-2014 and then compare it to 2015 and beyond. In 2012-2014 the two feet, control, and act common to the game could be completed at any point prior to contacting the ground, after they blew the Dez play, the act common to the game became upright long enough, which made going to the ground an even bigger part of the game because it required even more subjective decisions by officials. To simplify this from the onset of going to the ground until 2015, if you have control, get two feet down, and then do any act common to playing football, going to the ground ends and you have a catch. From 2015 you have to have control, two feet, and become a runner BEFORE you go to the ground. It became a brand new rule and not a clarification.

This play is the Victor Cruz play from 2013 opening weekend. Just an FYI in case anyone wanted to see it.

 

[blindzebra]

It's interesting that the AR# you are citing for this is different than the one Percy has cited. My bet is you have the right one, but I still haven't been able to find the 2014 casebook. Can you provide a link so I can get myself up to speed on that part of the story? Percey hasn't been able to help me out with that.

In any case, the casebook rule you are citing talks about the receiver only going to the ground because of contact after the first foot was down, and Dez was never not going to the ground.

There was no 2014 casebook. There were no changes to the catch rule from 2012 until 2015. None, no points of emphasis, no clarifications, nothing. That is from the last casebook published in 2012. Not having a new casebook each season is typical because you rarely have multiple major changes, so minor changes that affect caseplays will have new caseplays in the rulebook to cover them until a new casebook is published.

 

[Hoofbite]

In any case, the casebook rule you are citing talks about the receiver only going to the ground because of contact after the first foot was down, and Dez was never not going to the ground.

That's not really the distinguishing point of that play though. Going to the ground applies with, or without, contact.

That case play is highlighting an act that fulfills the 3rd prerequisite for a catch. The brace and/or the lunge.

Personally, I don't think anyone will find an ounce of consistency by looking at the rulebook or casebook. While the casebook makes it 100% clear that the player braced himself and lunged for the goal line, the extent to which a player can be said to have braced himself and/or lunged in a real game is entirely a matter of opinion. Without being told that a player braced himself and lunged, officials have to determine for themselves.

The rule can be interpreted to justify any outcome and there are countless aspects up for interpretation. It's probably the worst rule in sports because it's largely undefined. It's up to the official, which makes no sense because if we're going to introduce so much opinion into the matter then lets just go back to asking a much more simple question, "does the play pass the looks test?"

 

[OmerV]

That's not really the distinguishing point of that play though. Going to the ground applies with, or without, contact.

That case play is highlighting an act that fulfills the 3rd prerequisite for a catch. The brace and/or the lunge.

Personally, I don't think anyone will find an ounce of consistency by looking at the rulebook or casebook. While the casebook makes it 100% clear that the player braced himself and lunged for the goal line, the extent to which a player can be said to have braced himself and/or lunged in a real game is entirely a matter of opinion. Without being told that a player braced himself and lunged, officials have to determine for themselves.

The rule can be interpreted to justify any outcome and there are countless aspects up for interpretation. It's probably the worst rule in sports because it's largely undefined. It's up to the official, which makes no sense because if we're going to introduce so much opinion into the matter then lets just go back to asking a much more simple question, "does the play pass the looks test?"

The bold, underlined portion above is a fair statement.

 

[OmerV]

There was no 2014 casebook. There were no changes to the catch rule from 2012 until 2015. None, no points of emphasis, no clarifications, nothing. That is from the last casebook published in 2012. Not having a new casebook each season is typical because you rarely have multiple major changes, so minor changes that affect caseplays will have new caseplays in the rulebook to cover them until a new casebook is published.

According to Percy there was a 2014 casebook. I thought exactly as you pointed out that there wouldn't be a need for a new casebook every year.

 

[blindzebra]

I
In any case, the casebook rule you are citing talks about the receiver only going to the ground because of contact after the first foot was down, and Dez was never not going to the ground.

Dez landed on two feet with control and turned, that is when he got tangled with Shields, without contact we have no idea if he'd have gone to the ground or if he'd have regained his balance. In any case, that has no baring on the play which states that the 3 part process continues during going to the ground.

 

[ufcrules1]

That's not really the distinguishing point of that play though. Going to the ground applies with, or without, contact.

That case play is highlighting an act that fulfills the 3rd prerequisite for a catch. The brace and/or the lunge.

Personally, I don't think anyone will find an ounce of consistency by looking at the rulebook or casebook. While the casebook makes it 100% clear that the player braced himself and lunged for the goal line, the extent to which a player can be said to have braced himself and/or lunged in a real game is entirely a matter of opinion. Without being told that a player braced himself and lunged, officials have to determine for themselves.

The rule can be interpreted to justify any outcome and there are countless aspects up for interpretation. It's probably the worst rule in sports because it's largely undefined. It's up to the official, which makes no sense because if we're going to introduce so much opinion into the matter then lets just go back to asking a much more simple question, "does the play pass the looks test?"

Excellent spot on post.

 

[blindzebra]

I found it! the 2014 Rule and Casebook, and it has the 8.12 case play.

http://test.footballzebras.com/files/original/d7f57f11109a4a4353de0d4fe3437d4c.pdf

This is case closed, Blandino and company blew it....drops mic, close thread.

 

[OmerV]

Dez landed on two feet with control and turned, that is when he got tangled with Shields, without contact we have no idea if he'd have gone to the ground or if he'd have regained his balance. In any case, that has no baring on the play which states that the 3 part process continues during going to the ground.

On that we will have to agree to disagree. He landed first on one foot and my belief is he was clearly and immediately stumbling, and then stumbling even more as his second foot came down. He was scrambling, but there never appeared to be any time that he seemed to be in control enough to have any chance to stay upright.

As for the 3 part process, the point of following the listing of the 3 part process with Items 1, 2 and 3 was to set out different circumstances than covered by the basic 3 part process - they tell us the circumstances and rulings are different if a player is going to the ground or if the catch is a sideline catch than if it is just an upright catch in the middle of the field of play. They are the exceptions to the normal, upright, catch or no catch rules.

 

[blindzebra]

On that we will have to agree to disagree. He landed first on one foot and my belief is he was clearly and immediately stumbling, and then stumbling even more as his second foot came down. He was scrambling, but there never appeared to be any time that he seemed to be in control enough to have any chance to stay upright.

As for the 3 part process, the point of following the listing of the 3 part process with Items 1, 2 and 3 was to set out different circumstances than covered by the basic 3 part process - they tell us the circumstances and rulings are different if a player is going to the ground or if the catch is a sideline catch than if it is just an upright catch in the middle of the field of play. They are the exceptions to the normal, upright, catch or no catch rules.

No it doesn't. The caseplay I provided shows it. Did Dez have control? Yes. Did Dez get two feet down? Yes. Did Dez make a football move? Well, he turned, took a third step, extended the ball, and pushed off his left leg kicking up turf, so yes. He completed the 3 steps for a catch.

 

[OmerV]

I found it! the 2014 Rule and Casebook, and it has the 8.12 case play.

http://test.footballzebras.com/files/original/d7f57f11109a4a4353de0d4fe3437d4c.pdf

This is case closed, Blandino and company blew it....drops mic, close thread.

This isn't different than we've seen before in this thread. I believe he was going to the ground all the way, not just because of the contact as stated in 8.12, and I really don't think he lunged either. He reached with the ball, but he wasn't in control with his body enough to lunge. He was only headed toward the goal line because that is the direction he was running before he started going to the ground, and his momentum was taking him that way.