Catch or No Catch?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Jim D

JR,

Since we are using different rule books, this won't be a clean answer.

The receiver was trying to catch the ball and establish possession. While trying to do that, he ended up dropping the ball so if there was a question in my mind about which way to call it, I would not give the receiver the benefit of the doubt. I'd "punish" him for dropping the ball (an error on his part) by leaning the other way and calling it incomplete. Again, this is only if I were unsure of whether he had possession or not.

Does that answer your question?

Yes - it sounds to me like you're saying that A never had the ball firmly in his grasp to award possession.

We have a same philosophy here in Canada: when in doubt: incomplete. The corollary is that once you're certain of something, that's what it is. Whether it be a TD, a catch, incomplete, or a foul. To then go back and change my mind means that I need to learn from the situation and strive to have better judgment.

[ML99]

There is a post at another forum (refstripes) regarding the first video. It's from Bill LeMonnier and he says INCOMPLETE. I quote:

Survive the ground and/or survive the hit. If the hit is not late than the hit can be a factor in ruling this an incomplete pass. TV gives us some pretty good looks that neither official appeared to have in live action. The receiver went immediately to the ground and was immediately contacted by the defender. The ball came out immediately with this action. Not an easy call by any stretch of the imagination. I'd call this incomplete. The receiver hasn't survived the hit. Just being on the ground when the pass comes in doesn't mean you've possessed the ball. Make them hang on to the ball. Individual and crew consistency will improve if everyone on your crew can be on the same page with this type of call. That's one reason for the NCAA push for making these incomplete... it improves the consistency of this type of call. Make them possess it... in the field of play and in the end zone.

IMHO the player was down, on the ground with possession. TD. Then the hit ... but since Mr. LeMonnier is a Football Consultant and I'm an amateur referee I'd give his opinion more attention than mine. ;-) I am surprised that the most of you would have ruled TD as well.