Monday Night: Catch

[gsf23]

Originally Posted by rulesmaven

Anyway, as I thought I understood what was being discussed after the rule changes, there are two situations -- first is where the player establishes a legal catch before a tackle starts and the second is where the tackle is in progress before the catch has been established. Not sure if I'm saying that right, but essentially, if the player possesses the ball and establishes both feet in bounds, and then makes the infamaous "football move," it's a catch, and a subsequent loss of posession before the end of the play will be a fumble. The caveat, though, is where a player on the other team begins a tackle before the catch is established. In this second situation, the player needs to maintain control throughout, down to the ground.

Seems like Belichick knew the rule and quickly reminded the official on the spot, and it was upheld.

Or I'm crazy and just misremembering all this and it was a questionable call.

I've watched the play again, and Wiggins made the catch, turned up field and took at least one step BEFORE contact was made by the defender, another step before he was getting wrapped up, then as he is falling to the ground the defender rips the ball out. He clearly had posession and made a move before the tackle was initiated.

[rulesmaven]

Originally Posted by gsf23

I've watched the play again, and Wiggins made the catch, turned up field and took at least one step BEFORE contact was made by the defender, another step before he was getting wrapped up, then as he is falling to the ground the defender rips the ball out. He clearly had posession and made a move before the tackle was initiated.

Perhaps you're right about that. But if that's what we're talking about here -- the question whether the football move started before or after the tackle began -- it's just a simple judgment call that could go either way, no different from dozens of close plays every day in the NFL. It's certainly not worthy of Theisman's ire or the attention paid to it.

All that said, as I said, I have no idea if I'm actually correct about the interpretation.