ND/USC: Was It a Catch?

[Spence]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Sorry Spence, but what your looking for is a judgment call that is unique to every play. The only two judgments that matter (on the Collegiate level) are those of the covering official, and now, the replay official.

Hey, I'm with you. I know its a judgment call. However, since I'm not an official, I'm looking for what has to happen for it to be a catch.

Here's a picture I found that may help some visualize it. What happens (in my memory) after the picture is left hand catches the ball, foot in bounds, knee goes down out of bounds, ball pulled in.

Weis' Playcalling Against SC Was Inexcusable: Pathetic

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Spence

Here's a picture I found that may help some visualize it. What happens (in my memory) after the picture is left hand catches the ball, foot in bounds, knee goes down out of bounds, ball pulled in.

The problem with the picture it does not show the end result. You cannot complete a catch with the ball in the air. Possession must take place. And the fact that you are not a football official should at the very least have you understand that concept.

Peace

[Spence]

Originally Posted by Spence

Very last possession of USC/ND game. ND throws a jump ball to their TE. Ball is tipped up into the air.

ND TE reaches out and grabs the ball with one hand. His foot is in bounds. His knee then hits OOB before he pulls the ball into his body. It appeared that the ball was not bobbled.

I was wondering why it was considered to be incomplete.

If you saw the play or if you can make a judgment based on my description why was it called incomplete? Did he have to pull it into his body before his knee touched?

I am not a football official. Just like to know the rules.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The problem with the picture it does not show the end result. You cannot complete a catch with the ball in the air. Possession must take place. And the fact that you are not a football official should at the very least have you understand that concept.

Peace

Maybe if you'd read the thread instead of being the funny man....

[mbyron]

I guess I don't understand the problem here. The official on the field ruled that the receiver did not have possession before the knee touched OOB. This ruling was confirmed by the replay official.

The rule has been posted, but that's not the problem. Possession is a judgment call, and the judgment of both officials was no possession before going OOB.

When I watched it, I thought that they got it right. You didn't. What's to discuss?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I guess I don't understand the problem here. The official on the field ruled that the receiver did not have possession before the knee touched OOB. This ruling was confirmed by the replay official.

The rule has been posted, but that's not the problem. Possession is a judgment call, and the judgment of both officials was no possession before going OOB.

When I watched it, I thought that they got it right. You didn't. What's to discuss?

Originally Posted by Spence

Maybe if you'd read the thread instead of being the funny man....

The funny part is I was not trying to be funny. I was actually being rather serious and if you read mbyron's post, you will get where I am coming from. Then again, you are not an official right.

Peace

[Spence]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I guess I don't understand the problem here. The official on the field ruled that the receiver did not have possession before the knee touched OOB. This ruling was confirmed by the replay official.

The rule has been posted, but that's not the problem. Possession is a judgment call, and the judgment of both officials was no possession before going OOB.

When I watched it, I thought that they got it right. You didn't. What's to discuss?

Gentlemen, I apologize. I thought I was being clear in what I was asking.

You addressed the actual question in your 2nd paragraph. I've been trying to ask what exactly does an official look for to determine "possession." I fully realize as I've stated that its a judgement call.

I also fully realize both officials thought there was not possession. As a fan I'm asking (again) what has to happen. Can the player be deemed to have possession without pulling the ball into his chest?

[Jimmie24]

Yes a player can gain possession without bringing the ball into his chest. Again though, here is a judgement call. The officials in their judgement felt that he had not gained possession. Maybe it was because he had only one hand on the ball and pulled it into his chest. Possibly that gave them reason to doubt possession. Was this play reviewed? I would think that it was. That means that the review official didn't think there was enough to over turn it as well.

You might remember a certain play two super bowls ago where a giants player caught a pass by trapping it to his helmet. He was able to demonstrate control of the ball. Same thing would have to be done here.

[jjrye22]

I used to have a beautiful clip from a NCAA game a few years ago, where the R is running down the sideline and reaches up and one hands the ball. He had it firmly in his hand, but didn't bring it into his chest, he just kept running with it (you could say he palmed the ball).

He probably had huge hands.