AFC Championship - was that a TD?

[canuckrefguy]

Hello football officials, basketball official here....heck of a game between the Patriots and Ravens!

Everybody will, of course focus on Cundiff's missed FG - but what about that near-touchdown where the ball was knocked out of the receiver's hands while he was in the end zone?

It looked to me (fan who doesn't know the rules) like the guy caught it in the end zone and had full control before the defender swatted it out.

What's the application of the rules on that play? Curious....btw I was cheering for the Pats

Thanks in advance!

[canuckrefguy]

Hey folks,

I posted a query on the football forum, but doesn't look like they post much over there.

You bball guys who also ref football: wasn't that a TD before the defender knocked the ball out? Is it reviewable?

BTW- kicking position open in Baltimore next year

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

Hey folks,

I posted a query on the football forum, but doesn't look like they post much over there.

You bball guys who also ref football: wasn't that a TD before the defender knocked the ball out? Is it reviewable?

BTW- kicking position open in Baltimore next year

No it was not a catch. He has to "survive the hit or ground." He did neither of course. Also in the NFL they need to get two feet down, but still have to survive and immediate hit to show they have control. He had one foot down and could not hold on as bringing the ball into his body. That is much more the philosophy used at their level, but applied by many at other levels. I had a similar call in my State Final that even had more steps, but he never survived the hit or ground so I waved it off.

Peace

[canuckrefguy]

Okay, I think I get it.

Thanks, Rut - I just KNEW you'd be the first to respond

[michblue]

Under NFL rules.....the call was correct on the field of incomplete pass. A receiver must complete the entire "process" of catching the football on a pass play.

It is a rule that I am sure will be reviewed by the competition committee during the off season because of the number of apparent catches on plays or scoring plays that were waived off throughout the year.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I had a similar call in my State Final that even had more steps, but he never survived the hit or ground so I waved it off.

Peace

What does this mean? Survive the hit or ground?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

What does this mean? Survive the hit or ground?

Exactly what it says. You cannot get hit immediately and the ball pop out. You cannot hit the ground immediately and the ball pop out. There was a very good reason the Calvin Johnson play was ruled the way it was. It has nothing to do with steps and feet if you cannot display you have control. No cheap catches or interceptions.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Exactly what it says. You cannot get hit immediately and the ball pop out. You cannot hit the ground immediately and the ball pop out. There was a very good reason the Calvin Johnson play was ruled the way it was. It has nothing to do with steps and feet if you cannot display you have control. No cheap catches or interceptions.

Peace

So, what defines "immediately" if not feet or steps? What do you have to do to be considered in control?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

So, what defines "immediately" if not feet or steps? What do you have to do to be considered in control?

I honestly do not know if there is a definition for what you consider immediate. But usually the thought process is to make a "football move." If you are not ready to run up field, you are not going to award a cheap catch. For the laymen, turn up field as if you are going to run for more yardage after you have displayed control. If you cannot do that, then it is an incomplete pass even if it takes place in the end zone. This is done to not have cheap catch-fumble players as well. They would not have called that play a catch and fumble at the 50, so it is not a catch in the end zone.

peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by michblue

Under NFL rules.....the call was correct on the field of incomplete pass. A receiver must complete the entire "process" of catching the football on a pass play.

It is a rule that I am sure will be reviewed by the competition committee during the off season because of the number of apparent catches on plays or scoring plays that were waived off throughout the year.

If the rule was not changed last year, it was not going to get changed this year. They have been calling it this way for years to allow for more consistency. They have been very consistent, this is why you do not listen to the media about these plays.

Peace

[zm1283]

The better question is why was Vernon Davis flagged for his TD celebration in the NFC game for standing on the TV camera stand? Why is jumping into the stands legal, but that is not? What is the difference? He didn't have the ball or use it for a prop either.

[zm1283]

And by the way, I think the way the NFL rules are written/enforced are ridiculous when it comes to completing a catch (Like the Calvin Johnson catch last year), but the play in the OP from today was not even close to being a catch IMO.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by zm1283

The better question is why was Vernon Davis flagged for his TD celebration in the NFC game for standing on the TV camera stand? Why is jumping into the stands legal, but that is not? What is the difference? He didn't have the ball or use it for a prop either.

The Lambeau Leap was grandfathered in.

Using a camera stand wasn't.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

Hello football officials, basketball official here....heck of a game between the Patriots and Ravens!

Everybody will, of course focus on Cundiff's missed FG - but what about that near-touchdown where the ball was knocked out of the receiver's hands while he was in the end zone?

It looked to me (fan who doesn't know the rules) like the guy caught it in the end zone and had full control before the defender swatted it out.

What's the application of the rules on that play? Curious....btw I was cheering for the Pats

Thanks in advance!

It was not a TD because the ball was knocked loose just as the left foot came down, and therefore did not meet the requirement for retaining possession for an element of time.

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

They would not have called that play a catch and fumble at the 50, so it is not a catch in the end zone.

This part makes a tonne of sense in explaining the call.