Roger Goodell: Time To 'Start Over' On Catch Rule

[HMFFL]

If the league had started in the last decade I would be able to understand change needing to occur. But, since the league has been established for much longer than a decade, why are rules like this not already set where say 99.9% agree with it?

Roger Goodell addressed the ever-changing catch rule while addressing the media on Wednesday.

"From our standpoint, I would like to start back, instead of adding to the rule, subtracting the rule. Start over again and look at the rule fundamentally from the start," Goodell said. "Because I think when you add or subtract things you can still lead to confusion. These rules are very complex -- you have to look at what the unintended consequences are of making a change, which is what the Competition Committee, in my view, does so well and with so much thought."

Goodell addressed the catch rule for the second time in a week after acknowledging on Monday that it's heavily on his radar.

https://football.realgm.com/wiretap/39969/Roger-Goodell-Time-To-Start-Over-On-Catch-Rule

[Otis Driftwood]

If the league had started in the last decade I would be able to understand change needing to occur. But, since the league has been established for much longer than a decade, why are rules like this not already set where say 99.9% agree with it?

Until replay completely changed the dynamic of rule interpretation, it really didn't matter. Example - Super Bowl XII. If these rules and replay existed in 1978 then Butch Johnson's TD would have been ruled incomplete. At some point, you just look at a play and let common sense take over as opposed to implementing rules that break a completion down to such minutia that the only way to adjudicate a play is through replay.

I don't fault the officials. In fact, I applaud them. They do an excellent job of using replay to make the correct call based on interpretation of the rule. It's just a bad rule. I still don't know if tearing it down and rebuilding the rule as the Ginger God proposes will actually fix it. But as has been noted over and over by way more knowledgeable people than I (like Mike Pereira for example), when 99 of 100 people say Dez caught it or Jesse caught it or Calvin caught it, then there is a problem with the rule.

[HMFFL]

Otis Driftwood,

What is your opinion if a player catches a ball, but there is movement, and due to that the play is called a no catch?

[Mamba Mentality]

Catch rule doesn't need changing.

Goodell needs to focus on more pressing issues...like the PI rule. Change it 15 yards instead of spotting the ball at the spot of the foul. Need more offense instead of shortening the field so much.

[Otis Driftwood]

Otis Driftwood,

What is your opinion if a player catches a ball, but the has movement, and due to that the play is called a no catch?

Does he have control? Is that movement truly a lack of control?

Take any of the three most cited examples (Calvin Johnson / Dez Bryant / Jesse James)...

According to the rule as it is written - those are not catches. To Otis and 99% of normal football fans, those are catches.

It's a bad rule. That is a fairly universally accepted point.


The bigger issue - how do you fix a bad rule?

[HMFFL]

Does he have control? Is that movement truly a lack of control?

Take any of the three most cited examples (Calvin Johnson / Dez Bryant / Jesse James)...

According to the rule as it is written - those are not catches. To Otis and 99% of normal football fans, those are catches.

It's a bad rule. That is a fairly universally accepted point.


The bigger issue - how do you fix a bad rule?

Are you opposed to the rule just being a catch is a catch as long as the receiver doesn't use the ground to help him? These questions are just out of curiosity. The league has evolved this ruling to possibly hurt the game and it's possibly gone too far. I'm not opposed to a catch just being a catch, movement is fine, as long as the ground doesn't help the receiver.

[Otis Driftwood]

Does he have control? Is that movement truly a lack of control?

Take any of the three most cited examples (Calvin Johnson / Dez Bryant / Jesse James)...

According to the rule as it is written - those are not catches. To Otis and 99% of normal football fans, those are catches.

It's a bad rule. That is a fairly universally accepted point.


The bigger issue - how do you fix a bad rule?

Are you opposed to the rule just being a catch is a catch as long as the receiver doesn't use the ground to help him? These questions are just out of curiosity. The league has evolved this ruling to possibly hurt the game and it's possibly gone too far. I'm not opposed to a catch just being a catch, movement is fine, as long as the ground doesn't help the receiver.

Bingo! And in none of those cases does the ground "help the receiver".

Now... how to fix the rule...

[Otis Driftwood]

From the NFL Rulebook...

ARTICLE 3. COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS
A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:

secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
maintains control of the ball after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, until he has the ball long enough to clearly become a runner. A player has the ball long enough to become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps (see 3-2-7-Item 2).
Note: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.

If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch.

Item 1. Player Going to the Ground. A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

Item 2. Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, or the pass is incomplete.

Item 3. End Zone Catches. The requirements for a catch in the end zone are the same as the requirements for a catch in the field of play.

Note: In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, after which contact by a defender causes the ball to become loose before the runner is down by contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goal line prior to the loss of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.

Item 4. Ball Touches Ground. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control of it, it is a catch, provided that the player continues to maintain control.

Item 5. Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

Item 6. Carried Out of Bounds. If a player, who is in possession of the ball, is held up and carried out of bounds by an opponent before both feet or any part of his body other than his hands touches the ground inbounds, it is a completed or intercepted pass. It is not necessary for the player to maintain control of the ball when he lands out of bounds.

[hermes]

its amazing that after how many decades of playing football, we can't answer "what is a catch?"

might as well put it up along with other great unanswered questions like
are we alone in the universe?
do we have free will?
to be or not to be?

[Pharmcat]

still cant believe the Dez catch wasnt a catch

[HMFFL]

Otis Driftwood,
I read all of that. Thanks
However, I am fine with some movement, and the ball not having to be still. The league is looking way too hard into this rule and making it so much more than it really is.

[HMFFL]

its amazing that after how many decades of playing football, we can't answer "what is a catch?"

might as well put it up along with other great unanswered questions like
are we alone in the universe?
do we have free will?
to be or not to be?

Very true!

It's something that should be so simple but the league has made it so complex.

[Yoshun]

Catch rule doesn't need changing.

Goodell needs to focus on more pressing issues...like the PI rule. Change it 15 yards instead of spotting the ball at the spot of the foul. Need more offense instead of shortening the field so much.

You could have guys hammering receivers on anything over 15 yards though. If they believe the receiver has a shot at the ball.

[RavenMad31]

I think WRs need to retrain themselves to catch, control and either pull it to their body or make absolutely sure their hands are clearly under the football. The rule isn't unclear as it is written. It's unclear when you have the benefit of frame by frame instant replay. Some eyes see movement and lack of control. Others will insist the receiver is controlling the ball sufficiently to warrant a catch and a lot of that has to do with rooting interest. When a call doesn't go one's way, they'll blame the rule and wrongly insist that it's confusing. What isn't confusing is that if you put control of the ball and bringing it to your body as a priority over any kind of extension, you'll be alright. Two things have changed my opinion of the catch rule which I previously thought was kind of dumb. One was what Chris Carter had to say about the rule and his insight in how the competition committee came up with it. He starts around 2:30 if anyone is interested.

Watch on YouTube

The other thing was watching well over 900 yards of passing last night in a game that supposedly fielded a couple pretty good defenses and one backup QB. The requirements for a successful catch don't need to be any easier than they are. If anything, they should let up a little on the kind of contact they allow by DBs to restore some balance between defense and offense. That Super Bowl was like watching basketball. There were exactly two defensive plays the whole game. The pick by NE and the strip of Brady late. No sacks, no goal line stands, no big stop on third or fourth down.

[Mamba Mentality]

Catch rule doesn't need changing.

Goodell needs to focus on more pressing issues...like the PI rule. Change it 15 yards instead of spotting the ball at the spot of the foul. Need more offense instead of shortening the field so much.

The NFL is reportedly looking at implementing a number of rule changes, some expected (clarifying the catch rule) and some not so.

One of the surprising proposals offered by the NFL Competition Committee is to change the penalty for defensive pass interference from a spot foul to a 15-yard penalty at most, NFL Network's Judy Battista reported Tuesday. This is more in line with how the game is refereed on the collegiate level.

Changing the pass interference penalty is on its face a defense-first measure. Offenses would have far less to gain by "chucking it up" to try and draw a penalty from a grabby defensive back downfield.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000917735/article/nfl-could-change-defensive-pi-to-15yard-penalty

[Notas A3]

Catch rule doesn't need changing.

Goodell needs to focus on more pressing issues...like the PI rule. Change it 15 yards instead of spotting the ball at the spot of the foul. Need more offense instead of shortening the field so much.

The NFL is reportedly looking at implementing a number of rule changes, some expected (clarifying the catch rule) and some not so.

One of the surprising proposals offered by the NFL Competition Committee is to change the penalty for defensive pass interference from a spot foul to a 15-yard penalty at most, NFL Network's Judy Battista reported Tuesday. This is more in line with how the game is refereed on the collegiate level.

Changing the pass interference penalty is on its face a defense-first measure. Offenses would have far less to gain by "chucking it up" to try and draw a penalty from a grabby defensive back downfield.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000917735/article/nfl-could-change-defensive-pi-to-15yard-penalty

And what do we do when defenses start being more aggressive and cancelling touchdowns or possible touchdowns for a PI of only 15 yards? You need to play clean and with technique, if not, you should be penalized.

[NyKnicks1714]

Control and either 2 steps or any part of your body that's not your hands or feet touching the ground; end zone or otherwise. No "football move" bull, no distinction between being upright or going to the ground, no requirement to hold onto the ball after 2 steps. The moment your 2nd foot is down, it's a catch.

Start with that, then address bobbling.