Question on when a catch is completed.

[Mike Simonds]

Yesterday in our semipro game there was a pass over the middle of the field. The HL and SJ (6 man crew) ruled complete but from my umpire position I had the best view as the defender was coming back towards the ball. What I saw was the defender making a diving effort to catch the ball when his hands first made contact with the pass the ball was also touching the ground. Then he pulled it towards his chest with one fluid motion. So I can see that because he was coming back towards me I had the best view. I ran up and signaled incomplete pass and the HL and SJ were cool with that.

Is it true (because thats what we were told last season) that once the player first makes contact with the pass he also has to demonstrate control of the ball by doing something with it, such as pulling it towards his body, etc.? My belief is that if the ball touches the ground in any way before he has demonstrated ability to control it then we have an incomplete pass.

I'd like to get some input on this one. Thanks!

[ABoselli]

I'd have to see it but from what you describe, you have an incomplete pass. The ground can't be the 'third hand' which the receiver uses to secure possession.

If it went "hands grasped ball then ball hit ground" I would have complete. If it went "ball hit ground then/as hands grasped ball" I have incomplete.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: For what it's worth, the way you described it, I would agree with your call of incomplete.

[Snake~eyes]

Originally posted by Bob M.
REPLY: For what it's worth, the way you described it, I would agree with your call of incomplete.

what he said

[Theisey]

Great comment by Al regarding the ground can't be the third hand of a receiver.
Remember that and apply it when the situation arises.

[Mike Simonds]

What a great concept about the ground being the third hand! I'm going to share this with the guys over here.

And that is exactly what happened: imagine the ground and the defenders two hands coming into contact with the ball at the same time. Then like a good baseball catcher who pulls a pitch back into the strike zone he did a nice roll on the turf and pulled the ball into his chest.

Another play a receiver got his forearms between the ball and the ground and I make eye contact with the wings with a subtle catch signal.

Good mechanics points for working the passing game: especially the third hand concept.

[Snake~eyes]

Just curious, what kind of rules you playing over there? I assume its NFL?

[JMN]

Mike,

Great mechanics as an umpire. That's exactly why we're suppposed to pivot and take a look at the catch/alleged catch. Good job. You helped your crew make the right call.

Also, along the lines of a "third hand", the ground and the reciever can't make a simultaneous catch!

[TCGRACA]

I'm not sure if this applies or if I should start a new post, but in a youth game (little guys) on May 1, (in which fumbles are dead as soon as they hit the ground)the quarterback bobbled the snap and caught the ball on its way down. As he caught the ball and was continuing to pull back from the center, the tip of the ball touched the ground (I still can't say whether the ground provided that little extra help in maintaining control, though). Neither the Ref or I (as linesman) blew it dead but let play continue. Both of us thought that since he controlled the ball it was not a fumble (even though the tip of the ball did hit the turf). The opposing coach went ballistic, of course, and he kept yelling at me that it hit the ground. I just calmly replied that I did not see a fumble. Since this was fourth down and the team ended up making the first from this play, it became rather pivotal in the scheme of things. I'll take any and all lumps coming to me if it seems like we blew the call. Any thoughts?

[ABoselli]

My advice is to tell the yute coach to dial it down a notch, for pete sake.

It's important to try to get it right all the time, but, man, youth coaches drive me bananas with their crap.

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by TCGRACA
I'm not sure if this applies or if I should start a new post, but in a youth game (little guys) on May 1, (in which fumbles are dead as soon as they hit the ground)the quarterback bobbled the snap and caught the ball on its way down. As he caught the ball and was continuing to pull back from the center, the tip of the ball touched the ground (I still can't say whether the ground provided that little extra help in maintaining control, though). Neither the Ref or I (as linesman) blew it dead but let play continue. Both of us thought that since he controlled the ball it was not a fumble (even though the tip of the ball did hit the turf). The opposing coach went ballistic, of course, and he kept yelling at me that it hit the ground. I just calmly replied that I did not see a fumble. Since this was fourth down and the team ended up making the first from this play, it became rather pivotal in the scheme of things. I'll take any and all lumps coming to me if it seems like we blew the call. Any thoughts?

REPLY: Actually, whether or not it hit the ground might be immaterial depending on how your rules are written. If the QB did not ever fully posess the snap, what you have is a muffed backward pass--not a fumble. Though the definitions of snap and backward pass fail to specifically link the two, there are a number of places in the Federation rule book where they talk about backward passes and they add "including the snap" (e.g. NF 2-31-1c). Are the rules the same for backward passes (i.e. dead when they hit the ground)? In NCAA rules, a snap is also considered a backward pass.

[TCGRACA]

The rules don't mention a backward pass per se, but in practice, all backward passes and snaps over the QB's head (which happens a lot at this level) have been treated as fumbles and blown dead where they make contact with the ground. We thought the QB had possession, lost it, then re-gained it, but that really is a lot to expect from an 11-year old in such a short moment. Either way, it's still gets replayed in my mind over and over again -- and to no avail.

[ScottV]

11 year olds!? What's with this weird fumble rule for kids that age anyway?

It’s not a fumble if the ball is in player control, so it seems like your call is correct.