The TD catch that wasn't....

Gamecock72

Joined Sep 24, 2019
Jan 24, 2022
513
423
63
The rule, as written is extremely vague. "In the act of catching a pass" leaves a lot open to interpretation. If, after his knee touches the ground, the ground causes the ball to pop out, and that is ruled an incomplete pass, that opens a lot of other calls up to this interpretation. As noted above, why isn't a fumble when a RB's knee his the ground and then the ground causes the ball to pop out. In that circumstance, a ref will say "There was no fumble on the play, the runner's knee was down prior to the ball coming out."

He came down with both feet with secure possession of the ball, knee came down, still with secure possession of the ball. Ball is dead at that point. No longer in the act of catching a pass.
I disagree, it is not vague and every rules expert has clearly described this rule over and over in both the NFL and NCAA. It was the correct call per rules.
 

18IsTheMan

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2022
13,549
11,614
113
I disagree, it is not vague and every rules expert has clearly described this rule over and over in both the NFL and NCAA. It was the correct call per rules.
There are dozens of ways to make a catch, so, yes, "act of catching a pass" is very vague, and necessarily so.
 

Lurker123

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2022
3,361
2,890
113
Right. To me, the key is that his knee(s) hit the ground first. Player is down. Ball dead. Play over.

I get what you're saying, but the play is not over according to the rules. The play is over when a receiver "survives contact with the ground".

We may disagree with it, but that is the way the rule is written. A receiver catching a ball is not treated the same as a RB who already has posesion in the endzone.

Edit: subsequent posts actually posted the rule. The call was correct, but we should be discussing if we like the rule, not the call now.
 

Gamecock72

Joined Sep 24, 2019
Jan 24, 2022
513
423
63
I get what you're saying, but the play is not over according to the rules. The play is over when a receiver "survives contact with the ground".

We may disagree with it, but that is the way the rule is written. A receiver catching a ball is not treated the same as a RB who already has posesion in the endzone.
Exactly, I do not get how someone could think it is vague. It is clearly stated that the receiver must maintain control of the ball through fall to the ground. There is no grey area to it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lurker123

PrestonyteParrot

Well-known member
May 28, 2024
1,061
1,039
113
I get what you're saying, but the play is not over according to the rules. The play is over when a receiver "survives contact with the ground".

We may disagree with it, but that is the way the rule is written. A receiver catching a ball is not treated the same as a RB who already has posesion in the endzone.

Edit: subsequent posts actually posted the rule. The call was correct, but we should be discussing if we like the rule, not the call now.
Stupid rule. The receiver is competing with two defenders. After a clear catch with possession defeating the DB, the ground becomes a second defender who can dislodge the ball and take away the catch.
 

18IsTheMan

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2022
13,549
11,614
113
Overall, I have to say, the refs were pretty generous to us, even if they obviously blew this call.

They overturned the one catch by Clemson, saying the receiver's was out of bounds. It was extremely close and I really don't think there was indisputable evidence to overturn the initial call. Not saying he wasn't out of bounds, but it was very close, and this is not the kind of call that has typically gone in our favor.

The fumble call against Clemson late in the game. Close one as well. I thought they couldn't go back to review a potential fumble if the player was ruled down, but I guess that rule has changed. It was odd, though, to go back and review that one to give us possession, as Mafah was ruled down and the play whistled dead so Clemson players didn't jump on the ball like they might have otherwise.

Was that also the review that ensuing play was blown dead when Clemson had completed another decent pass?

Can't recall when we've gotten the benefit of two very big reviews like that in a single game.
 

Lurker123

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2022
3,361
2,890
113
Stupid rule. The receiver is competing with two defenders. After a clear catch with possession defeating the DB, the ground becomes a second defender who can dislodge the ball and take away the catch.

Agreed. We should argue the merits of the rule, but it was called correctly on the field.
 

Gamecock72

Joined Sep 24, 2019
Jan 24, 2022
513
423
63
Overall, I have to say, the refs were pretty generous to us, even if they obviously blew this call.

They overturned the one catch by Clemson, saying the receiver's was out of bounds. It was extremely close and I really don't think there was indisputable evidence to overturn the initial call. Not saying he wasn't out of bounds, but it was very close, and this is not the kind of call that has typically gone in our favor.

The fumble call against Clemson late in the game. Close one as well. I thought they couldn't go back to review a potential fumble if the player was ruled down, but I guess that rule has changed. It was odd, though, to go back and review that one to give us possession, as Mafah was ruled down and the play whistled dead so Clemson players didn't jump on the ball like they might have otherwise.

Was that also the review that ensuing play was blown dead when Clemson had completed another decent pass?

Can't recall when we've gotten the benefit of two very big reviews like that in a single game.
Was not a blown call. It was the correct pall per the rules.
 

Bubba Fett

Joined Oct 6, 2000
Feb 1, 2022
1,513
1,555
113
It's pretty simple. "Thems the rules."

A rule that is illogical and inconsistent, but still the rule.

It needs changing.
 

Gamecock72

Joined Sep 24, 2019
Jan 24, 2022
513
423
63

What is a catch in college football in 2024-25? How the NCAA differs from the NFL

Do you know what constitutes a catch in college football? Do the refs?

It can be confusing sometimes, and it’s even become a recurring joke among college football fans that no one really knows what a catch is.

But there are a lot of factors that can come into play or create confusion, like one or two feet in bounds, did the receiver bobble it or did they have control?

Thankfully we do know how a catch is as defined in the NCAA’s official rulebook. And given that college football’s biggest games are just around the corner, it’s probably a good idea to brush up on how completing a college football catch works in the NCAA.

Though officials on the field may rule catches on a subjective matter, here’s now making a catch is defined in the NCAA online rulebook.

What is a catch in college football, as defined by the NCAA?​

As per the NCAA rulebook, there are three main parts to defining a catch. For a catch to occur, the player:

  1. Secures firm control with the hand(s) or arm(s) of a live ball in flight before the ball touches the ground, and
  2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of his body, and then
  3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable that player to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.
Pretty simple, right?

The act of securing the ball and making a “football move” are the key elements here. And in the NCAA, a player only needs to have one foot down and in bounds to secure the catch, unlike the NFL which requires both feet.

That being said, there are three stipulations to the above rules which must be satisfied in order for a pass to be ruled a catch. They are as follows:

  • If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent) he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also required for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and going to the ground out of bounds. If he loses control of the ball which then touches the ground before he regains control, it is not a catch. If he regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is a catch.
  • If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the ground with any part of his body, or if there is doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; he must lose control of the ball in order for there to be a loss of possession.
  • If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control and continues to maintain control, and the elements above are satisfied, it is a catch.
All that basically means that a loss of control that is not recovered before the ball touches the ground does not count as a catch. But, if the player does regain control of the ball inbounds before touching the ground, that counts as a catch.

And, perhaps most importantly, when it’s in question, the catch is not complete.
 
Get unlimited access today.

Pick the right plan for you.

Already a member? Login