|
Catch or No Catch?
Hello Guys
how would you rule this one (NCAA)? http://video.yahoo.com/watch/2386486/7443923 Catch or No Catch? http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/2382/refoj4.png |
Only the last few seconds of the clip show what happened clearly. A receiver ends up sitting on his rear in the endzone holding the ball. After that a defender hits him and dislodges the ball. This should have been a TD.
|
IMO, its a catch and therefore, a TD. He had posession when he hit the ground. Hitting the ground caused him to be down, which ends the play. Looked like the ball didn't come out until he was hit by the defender. Tough play to call without the benefits of looking at it 3 times in slow motion! :D
|
No ruling from me: poor video.
|
It seems the last camera view clearly shows the receiver maintaining control of the ball after hitting the ground until a defender bashes it out of his hands with his helmet. The initial TD call looks to have been correct. The deep official appeared to be in excellect position to see what happened and rule on the play. surprisingly he was over ruled.
|
What's with the mesh adjustable hat on the referee? Hard to maintain credibility when you wear something like that. Is that advertising on the front of it?
|
Quote:
|
And how would you know about trapped heat in Ontario?:D
Not sure what the NCAA definition of a catch is but in Fed, which is what Cali plays under, that should have been a TD from the last look. He had possession and was on the ground, defender knocked loose a dead ball. |
Td!
|
Catch.
|
So I hooked my laptop up to my 46" TV.
I can see the video a lot better now. I have a TD. The receiver survived the contact with the ground, therefore touchdown, with Canadian philosophy. The act that caused the ball to dislodge was the helmet of a B player. Since this act was after the player surviving contact with the ground, it's effect on possession is irrelevant. |
The related video on the right:
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/2388386/7449583 Thoughts? I have a catch / forward progress stopped. |
REPLY: Both of these plays are excellent teaching tools. In particular, the first one points out a fundamental philosophical difference between Fed and NCAA. In Fed, one might justifiably say that the player had possession while on his back in the endzone. Therefore the ball is dead (and the result is a TD) when the defender comes in and strips the ball off the receiver's chest. In NCAA, the prevalent thought is that the result is an incomplete pass. Their philosophy is that the receiver's control must survive both (a) his going to the ground, i.e. the ground can cause an incompletion, and (b) the immediate hit by the defender (assuming that the hit isn't so late as to be deemed a PF).
In the second play--the one that JugglingRef posted--I see it as an incomplete pass for both codes. Notice that when the defender finally makes contact with the receiver's arm(s), the ball is well below his belt, and the ball actually has its point in the receiver's crotch--not a place where I could legitimately say he had clear control and possession. And, with all due respect to JR, I really can't see it as a situation where forward progress has been stopped, since the runner hasn't lost voluntary use of his legs. Ask yourself: If the receiver had maintained possession and then broken free, would you feel good about having blown the whistle and killed the play? |
In the second video (the one that I posted), the first angle is not as good as the second angle.
Using the second angle, my opinion is this timeline:
Forward progress philosophies often mention surviving contact with the ground or with a player. Since A stepped twice with contact from B, he established this contact survival. After initial contact by B, A still maintained an upright position while stepping. After another 2 steps, he started to go down on his own, in my opinion, due to the superior position by the defensive player. At that point, forward progress is stopped. I believe that A has lost voluntary use of his legs because B is clearly pushing A backwards and to the ground. I stopped the video at -0:12 to get this view: http://www.wwcfoa.ca/temp/12s_left.JPG The ball carrier is not getting out of that position. Even if B releases his grip on A, A's momentum will carry him to the ground. IMHO, you either have a fumble or forward progress stopped situation. If A were to break free (and question our knowledge of physics :D), I would not be bothered by having already blown forward progress down, since I am consistent with my rulings. |
Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, we don't usually have the luxury of detailed analysis in a stop action, second by second review opportunity. The very nature of a bang-bang play is that they happen bang-bang.
Even after reviewing the tape, I would personally conclude the pass was incomplete, but that really is not significant, because I wouldn't argue with anyone calling it a complete pass. Most importantly is the question was the covering official in an appropriate position to see the play and make the call I think a far greater problem is the notion that being absolutely correct, down to the gnat's eyelash level, is somehow "good for the game". Film and detailed review can be good teaching tools, but that's all they should ever be. The game is played at the bang-bang level because the speed of that level is what makes the game unique and special. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:21am. |