The NFL Catches and Credibility

[dogunwo]

Oh yeah, Mike Pereira is an idiot. I'm shocked that this fool was ever in charge of heading the refs for a professional sport. He brings no value whatsoever to professional football.

They need to remove them from the broadcast. All they do is bring more confusion and speculation when they are wrong. They also make fans assume that the call on the field was wrong.

 

[percyhoward]

Not perfect, but at least there were several things that counted as a football move. The whole "completing the catch when going to the ground" left too much interpretation up to the referee.

Exactly. People complain about the football move being ambiguous (which it is somewhat), but you tell me which is the easier method for determining completion of the catch process: "upright long enough " (one-Mississippi-two-Mississippi), or an actual, visible move that either happens or doesn't.

 

[HoosierCowboy]

The NFL is like the Feds -- do something stupid but never admit it. A catch should be control and both feet down or ruled down, period. Dez's was a catch, then but would clearly be one with the rule changed. What's wrong with more catches?

 

[drawandstrike]

That moment you realize referees are pretty much making it up as they go along and there's nothing you can do about it, your team is at their mercy.

 

[Diehardblues]

I have no issues with what a catch is.

I have a bigger issue with reviewing every single catch. It's over analyzed.

Its not how Instant Replay was intended.

 

[DogFace]

Sometimes I have to wonder if people watch the same feed as I do.

Pereira never said the play should be overturned. He pointed out a possibility the refs might consider when reviewing the play, and he was right to do so. The ruling on the replay was that it stands, not that is was confirmed. That means they did consider the things he brought up, but weren't really sure which way to go with it. When they showed the replay, I was worried the refs might rule it incomplete as well. It would not have surprised me at all.

It does illustrate that the officials don't really understand how they're supposed to rule on these catches anymore (if they ever did). I think a lot of us have a good idea of what the rule was supposed to be about and how it was to be applied, and the NFL has kind of botched that and confused the issue. Now, after all the criticism, I think they are going to just stick with the ruling on the field a lot more and rely on the ability to allow the call to stand without conclusive evidence.

He said "I think this gets reversed" or something very close to that. He absolutely thought it would be and he said it.

 

[JDSmith]

He said "I think this gets reversed" or something very close to that. He absolutely thought it would be and he said it.

Pereira: Well, you know what I'm seeing? This is the old process of going to the ground - is he going directly to the ground or was he on his feet? And if they deem that he's going to the ground, then when the ball hits and comes out it's an incomplete pass. You know, they've been really consistent in staying with calls that are being made on the field but I think there is a strong notion here, because of what they've said about going directly to the ground that they might consider this...

Referee: After reviewing the play the ruling on the field stands. Touchdown.

 

[Kevinicus]

He said "I think this gets reversed" or something very close to that. He absolutely thought it would be and he said it.

Or not.

 

[T-RO]

Pereira: Well, you know what I'm seeing? This is the old process of going to the ground - is he going directly to the ground or was he on his feet? And if they deem that he's going to the ground, then when the ball hits and comes out it's an incomplete pass. You know, they've been really consistent in staying with calls that are being made on the field but I think there is a strong notion here, because of what they've said about going directly to the ground that they might consider this...

Referee: After reviewing the play the ruling on the field stands. Touchdown.

Exactly. It's absurdity.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

The old rule was a good rule because it was simple. If the ball comes loose when the receiver goes to the ground, it's a catch if they advance the football. It was as simple as that.

I think it's pretty clear what has happened. When Dez made the catch, somebody brought it to the attention of the league office about the Calvin Johnson rule and Dean Blandino didn't understand the Calvin Johnson rule. Johnson was in the end zone when he caught the pass and therefore could not physically advance the football. Dez was not in the end zone, advanced the football by simply falling forward and then stretched out to try and get a TD.

The league made a mistake and Blandino realized it and then went into full spin control mode and now we have the disaster we see today.



YR

 

[nathanlt]

For all the conversation in this thread, there are two elements that I disagree with. One, "just let Blandino/officials determine what a catch is, then live with it" That resignation is defeatist, and sets the precedent that officials can ignore the rules and use their whims, 100%, without any opportunity for replay to evaluate. Absolutely wrong, it then allows for officials to fix games based on carefully selective moments of tampering.

Two, this kind of goes in hand with the first one, is not to use slow motion replay to determine what actually happened. This is a Blandino absurdity, and he is thanking whoever pushes that idea. Blandino actually said that slow motion DISTORTS what actually happened. That comment alone should have gotten him fired, he is more concerned with changing public opinion than he is with making things right. He is not for fair play, he is motivated to let officials arbitrarily determine games. He is corrupt.

 

[links18]

The problem with the Dez call wasn't that they ruled it a non-catch (because nobody knows what a catch is). The problem was that they overturned the ruling on the filed without indisputable evidence.

 

[T-RO]

...That comment alone should have gotten him fired, he is more concerned with changing public opinion than he is with making things right. He is not for fair play, he is motivated to let officials arbitrarily determine games. He is corrupt.

Yup. But while you have a shovel...dig a few inches deeper. Who runs the show?

 

[adbutcher]

The pass is complete...or it's incomplete.

Can you as a fan explain the current NFL rule for what is a catch and what degree of possession is insufficient? Can any of your buddies?

Have you noticed that the announcers who study the game...can't tell? Even the officials themselves can't seem to agree.

In the Packer game right after the Cole catch the broadcast team bounced over to Mike Pereira...the president of officiating ...and the guy starts to say Cole's catch would be overturned...that it wasn't a completed pass. Of course...that conversation stopped abruptly when the play was rightly upheld.

This play wasn't on the sidelines. It wasn't obscured. Cameras had a clear view. It wasn't in anyway an unusual play. We see that kind of thing all the time on the goal line.

And this has been going on for years now. The league has refused to simplify it, or fix it. The NFL could go back to the old rules, which everyone understood and which made total sense...but they refuse to.

Fans hate it. Players hate it. Coaches hate it. Announcers hate it. The rule is mush and there's no reason for it at all.

I'm open to other possibilities, but the only only conclusion I can come to is that the league wants the rule to stay foggy....that it gives them an opportunities for the League to engineer results that benefit their ratings or even somebody's pocket.

And they wonder why viewership is down. I personally stopped watching other NFL teams after the Greenbay debacle. I also stopped buying official gear. Until the NFL fixes this, they can go screw themselves.

 

[kycowboyfan]

this pretty much sums it up.
Complete history of the NFL's dumb catch rule confusing people
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/11/20/9746130/nfl-catch-rule-controversies-calvin-johnson-referees