Wow, I think we’ve actually found the dumbest mofo on the entire Internet. Hand it to the referee??? WTF???

But there’s the problem — the ‘sniff test’ isn’t good enough; it’s too subjective and — like Potter’s porn analogy — lacks any substance that officials can apply across the board and use to justify their call.

If even the NFL’s competition committee, whom have seen more catches and potential catches than any of you, cannot come up with a definition of a ‘catch’ that can be unambiguous and applicable to the innumerable ways a football may meet a would-be-receiver’s hands and/or the ground, then I’d be very interested in seeing how you so define a ‘catch’ and would recommend you call the competition committee.

————————————

Everyone knows that should have been a catch. That is one of the problems. They can talk and talk and talk and talk and talk some more, trying to explain the rule. But it’s crap, and I think you know it.

The rule is written poorly, and they are about to make it worse. You cannot take away ALL judgement from the officials. The rule cannot be a simple “sniff test” but it’s got to be clear, which it is not. Right now it’s absurd. A guy can catch the ball, fall down with the ball never touching the ground, go out of bounds and have it not count because the ball moved slightly in his hands. Please. No amount of explaining can excuse that, because it goes against all common sense.

But there’s the problem — the ‘sniff test’ isn’t good enough; it’s too subjective and — like Potter’s porn analogy — lacks any substance that officials can apply across the board and use to justify their call.

If even the NFL’s competition committee, whom have seen more catches and potential catches than any of you, cannot come up with a definition of a ‘catch’ that can be unambiguous and applicable to the innumerable ways a football may meet a would-be-receiver’s hands and/or the ground, then I’d be very interested in seeing how you so define a ‘catch’ and would recommend you call the competition committee.

If a completion can’t be determined on a consistent basis by all officiating crews, maybe they should just go back to the old rule of the ball not being allowed to touch the ground (whether the ball moves or it doesn’t move). If it touches the ground in the process of catching it, it’s not a catch.

And I don’t like that catching out of bounds thing either.

—-Agree. Did you see the proposed “clarification?” It’s a nightmare.

For once we have a rule that is black and white with minimal gray area to mess things up. Further, the rule has been around for years and years now and everyone knows it – including Calvin Johnson.

Good teams teach their wide receivers to follow it by practicing these things and emphasizing them. Bad teams like the Lions don’t manage to do that and that’s how they find ways to lose. That’s the bottom line.