NFL Catch Rule vs. NCAA & NFHS

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by FormerUmp

Nobody has anything to say about the suggestion in that video?

I like it, except for the concept of distinguishing action out of bounds from that in bounds. Somebody makes a late hit out of bounds, we don't want that to be discounted because it was out of bounds; etc. A determination of dead ball spot or touchdown can be held in abeyance pending evidence of a catch, so I don't see the problem he does with that part. But he's right on when it comes to his initial critique and fix.

[bisonlj]

To satisfy all the pundits and fans who think the current rule isn't consistent, I offer this suggestion.

If my gut tells me it's a catch, it's a catch.

You can't get much simpler than that. It's also grossly subjective, but this is the only way I think we can satisfy all these "experts." The stupid fan video actually shows how consistent the calls have been. In the Gronk case he appears to control the ball the entire time and the fact it may have scraped the ground is irrelevant. The other Patriots catch it's hard to tell if the ball came loose. If it did, that would be incomplete. As I recall, the Steelers INT was graded as an incorrect application of the catch rule. That's still subjective but sometimes supervisors/graders will get the call wrong.

[FormerUmp]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

To satisfy all the pundits and fans who think the current rule isn't consistent, I offer this suggestion.

If my gut tells me it's a catch, it's a catch.

You can't get much simpler than that. It's also grossly subjective, but this is the only way I think we can satisfy all these "experts." The stupid fan video actually shows how consistent the calls have been. In the Gronk case he appears to control the ball the entire time and the fact it may have scraped the ground is irrelevant. The other Patriots catch it's hard to tell if the ball came loose. If it did, that would be incomplete. As I recall, the Steelers INT was graded as an incorrect application of the catch rule. That's still subjective but sometimes supervisors/graders will get the call wrong.

In the Gronkowski play, the ball rotates significantly upon contact with the ground. The ball clearly moves in the Falcons play as well. There's just no consistency.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

To satisfy all the pundits and fans who think the current rule isn't consistent, I offer this suggestion.

If my gut tells me it's a catch, it's a catch.

AFAIK, that's how it's been ruled in baseball since, like, forever. Baseball has lots of cases of fielders falling with the ball, the ball's popping out, the ball's being carried over a field boundary, and cases where voluntary release has to be distinguished from failure to catch. Yet even at the highest levels of the game, unlike the NFL, they've never seen a need to refine it further or adopt some proxy determination for that judgment call.

[FormerUmp]

Another example of an incorrect overturn to highlight the inconsistency. This was originally called a TD on the field.

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/liJr...25613/KB.0.gif

Originally Posted by Mike Pereira on Twitter

regarding the Buffalo no touchdown, nothing more irritating to an official than to make a great call and then someone in a suit in an office in New York incorrectly reverses it. It is more and more obvious that there isn't a standard for staying with the call on the field.

And, in the interest of fairness, the official NFL explanation:

In #BUFvsNE, when Kelvin Benjamin gains control, his left foot is off the ground. The receiver only has one foot down in bounds with control. Therefore, it is an incomplete pass. -AL