The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 11, 2017, 12:06pm
Broadcaster
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: LaGrange, Ga.
Posts: 364
Catch or no catch (NFHS)

Video

I don't have a dog in the fight, and the next NFHS football game I officiate will be my first. Just curious from those who do this every week if you think this was a catch or not. The play starts 20 seconds in and another angle around 30 seconds in.

Thanks.
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 11, 2017, 12:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,593
Tough call. The pass was clearly complete and the receiver had possession when he became a runner. After he was hit, however, and BEFORE he contacted the ground, he appeared to lose possession of the ball (on the way down).

From the angle of the camera, you can't tell whether he had broken the plane of the goal line before, or after, he lost possession. Subsequent camera angle showed the wing official in the proper position to make that judgment.
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 11, 2017, 12:32pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,463
Embedding is your friend



I have little issues with the call. Looks to me like he was bobbling the ball the entire part and then tried to dive.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 11, 2017, 01:15pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 130
I have a touchdown. Clean catch followed by the ball breaking the plane prior to him losing possession. The only debate I could even consider entertaining would be that he was down prior the ball breaking the plane, and I just don't think that's the case.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 11, 2017, 02:32pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,770
Watching the end zone view, it looks like the ball is coming loose before he's down.

I didn't see what Jeff saw, but I don't care enough to go back and watch again.
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 11, 2017, 04:24pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,770
Oh, look, they're appealing to the GHSA to overturn the call of incomplete.

Won't happen, you say?

Well, the GHSA decided to overturn a judgment call in a baseball game this past spring despite their own rules.

Precedent Set, Georgia Faces 2nd Judgment Call Protest | Close Call Sports & Umpire Ejection Fantasy League
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 11, 2017, 04:25pm
Chain of Fools
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,648
Been discussed on the NFHS FB page- from end zone view, he tucks ball into his right arm then breaks plane. Anything after that doesn't matter as it was a TD when he broke the plane with possession.

Some have gone back and found where the WR stepped out of bounds further up field but no IP flag was thrown, which would have negated the score anyway so in a perfect world.......

Deep wing was obviously screened out for some of the play by the receivers own body.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 11, 2017, 04:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
Oh, look, they're appealing to the GHSA to overturn the call of incomplete.

Won't happen, you say?

Well, the GHSA decided to overturn a judgment call in a baseball game this past spring despite their own rules.

Precedent Set, Georgia Faces 2nd Judgment Call Protest | Close Call Sports & Umpire Ejection Fantasy League
Once you open a can of worms, it's really hard to get them all back in the can.
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 11, 2017, 04:37pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by HLin NC View Post
Been discussed on the NFHS FB page- from end zone view, he tucks ball into his right arm then breaks plane. Anything after that doesn't matter as it was a TD when he broke the plane with possession.

Some have gone back and found where the WR stepped out of bounds further up field but no IP flag was thrown, which would have negated the score anyway so in a perfect world.......

Deep wing was obviously screened out for some of the play by the receivers own body.
If he was going to the ground as part of completing the catch, I'd make him survive the ground. But in this play the catch was obviously completed well before this and the dive was part of the run, not the catch.

The end zone view doesn't tell me when he actually crosses the plane of the GL, but I'm assuming it's pieced together from other views.
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 12, 2017, 10:57am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
If he was going to the ground as part of completing the catch, I'd make him survive the ground.
The end zone view doesn't tell me when he actually crosses the plane of the GL, but I'm assuming it's pieced together from other views.
I don't find anything about, "I'd make him survive the ground" included in NFHS 2-4 that defines a "catch", a long as there is confirmation when, " first contacting the ground (in bounds) while maintaining possession" the requirements for "a catch" have been met, which may well be different that other rule codes.

If in the endzone NFHS 8-2-b establishes it is a TD, and what happens thereafter happens to a dead ball.
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 12, 2017, 11:12am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmc View Post
I don't find anything about, "I'd make him survive the ground" included in NFHS 2-4 that defines a "catch", a long as there is confirmation when, " first contacting the ground (in bounds) while maintaining possession" the requirements for "a catch" have been met, which may well be different that other rule codes.

If in the endzone NFHS 8-2-b establishes it is a TD, and what happens thereafter happens to a dead ball.
You can quote what you want till the cows come home, but:

If he's in the process of catching the ball as he's going to the ground and the ball comes out, there's no way I'm ruling it a catch.
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 12, 2017, 04:34pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
You can quote what you want till the cows come home, but:

If he's in the process of catching the ball as he's going to the ground and the ball comes out, there's no way I'm ruling it a catch.
I run into some coaches who feel the same way, even after explaining the differences to them. The only suggestion I can then offer is, perhaps they should consider coaching at a different level, where they may be more comfortable with rules.
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 12, 2017, 06:13pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmc View Post
I don't find anything about, "I'd make him survive the ground" included in NFHS 2-4 that defines a "catch", a long as there is confirmation when, " first contacting the ground (in bounds) while maintaining possession" the requirements for "a catch" have been met, which may well be different that other rule codes.

If in the endzone NFHS 8-2-b establishes it is a TD, and what happens thereafter happens to a dead ball.
I see "surviving the ground" and "first contacting the ground (in bounds) while maintaining possession" as part of the catch as the same thing. Maybe I'm wrong?
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 12, 2017, 11:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Woodstock, GA
Posts: 63
I saw a Hudl film of the play, and also missed was that the receiver stepped out out bounds while running his route. The IP, were it called, would have made any catch irrelevant.
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 13, 2017, 12:39am
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodScout View Post
I saw a Hudl film of the play, and also missed was that the receiver stepped out out bounds while running his route. The IP, were it called, would have made any catch irrelevant.
I've also read that the officials erred on a couple of fumbles by the losing team that should have been awarded to the winning team, but ended up staying with the losing team. Assuming they truly erred and failed to officiate two turnovers correctly, that could have impacted the game significantly.

Of course none of this should matter because nothing should be changed. The game is over. That should be the end of it. Even if it's not, how do you pick one missed call out of an entire game and only "fix" that one?

Unfortunately they set a precedent earlier this year overturning an umpire's call that ended a playoff baseball game, breaking multiple rules in the process. Things likely won't be quite as simple as they should be.

Last edited by FormerUmp; Wed Dec 13, 2017 at 12:41am.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
fair/foul - then catch/no-catch David Emerling Baseball 36 Tue May 07, 2013 08:58am
Catch/No Catch- Atlanta v. Chicago biggravy Baseball 10 Thu Apr 08, 2010 08:27am
Ankiel injury - Catch/No-catch? TxUmp Baseball 17 Wed May 06, 2009 11:26pm
Catch or no catch(foul ball)? illiniwek8 Baseball 2 Sat Mar 25, 2006 07:16pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:31am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1