Changes to catch rule will make it harder to overturn on-field rulings of a catch

Getty Images

The new rule book is out, posted online for anyone to (try to) read and to (try to) understand. The hot button continues to be the definition of what is and isn’t a catch, and this year’s rule book has a new provision aimed at articulating the moment when a player who gets both hands on the ball and both feet down has officially caught a pass.

Previously, Rule 8, Article 3 simply required the player with the ball in his possession and both feet (or any body part other than his hands) on the ground to “maintain[] control over the ball . . . until he has clearly become a runner.” The only problem, of course, is that it’s not clear to all officials what it takes to “clearly become a runner.”

The language has now been enhanced, with an effort to articulate the always-ambiguous time requirement inherent to completing the process of catching the ball. Under the 2016 rule book, a player has caught a pass when he “maintains control of the ball . . . 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.” (New language added in italics.)

Ostensibly, this language is present to guide the officials when deciding whether a catch has occurred, specifically when the receiver loses possession upon hitting the ground. The primary motivation for making the changes, however, could be (and my guess would be that it is) to make it harder to overturn a ruling on the field that the player has indeed caught the ball.

With the league office now directly involved in all replay reviews — and with the league office technically able to chime in before any ruling on the field is finalized and in turn teed up for formal replay review — there’s an easy way for the NFL to minimize those situations in which a Keystone Cops vibe arises regarding the question of whether a player has caught the ball. The unspoken approach, I believe, has become to nudge the officials toward erring on the side of calling a catch anything that looks like a catch. Then, applying the high bar of “indisputable visual evidence” during replay review, it becomes very hard to conclude that it’s sufficiently clear from the available camera angles that the player didn’t make the catch.

The new language in the rule will make it even harder to overturn the ruling on the field of a catch. The question for each referee who goes under the hood (and who hears directly from Dean Blandino or Al Riveron while doing so) will now be this: Is it indisputable that the player didn’t have the ball long enough to avoid or ward off impending contact of an opponent, to tuck the ball away, to turn up the field, or to take additional steps?

Blandino and Riveron surely will emphasize during the replay review process that the “has the ball long enough” requirement compels not just a frame-by-frame analysis of the images but a full-speed assessment of whether the player had the ball long enough to do any of the things listed, even if he didn’t do them. And there must be indisputable evidence that he didn’t have the time to do those things.

The league’s shift toward the reliance on the strict terms of the replay standard as a way to allow game officials to apply a know-it-when-you-see-it approach to the ruling on the field became apparent during the Green Bay-Arizona playoff game, after a ruling of a catch by Cardinals receiver Larry Fitzgerald wasn’t overturned via replay review, even though he lost possession of the ball upon hitting the ground. The NFL, however, has to date shied away from making any formal announcements regarding the new practical approach to the catch rule — possibly because the NFL realizes that saying too much about it would legitimize the “Dez caught it” crowd.

And indeed he did catch it. In that playoff loss to Green Bay from 18 months ago, Bryant clearly had the ball long enough to become a runner, because he become a runner, tucking the ball into his elbow and lunging toward the goal line with it.

The league’s new procedure is aimed at ensuring another “Dez caught it” situation arises without admitting that Dez caught it. Ideally, moving forward the things the NFL regards as a catch will mesh with the visceral, common sensical reaction of fans who believe that the league has tried on too many occasions over most of the last decade to turn valid catches into incompletions.

62 responses to “Changes to catch rule will make it harder to overturn on-field rulings of a catch

  1. Anything that makes it more likely that the Dez catch would be ruled a catch is a good thing, although it would have been terrible to be deprived of that historic meltdown choke job the next week against Seattle.

  2. Wouldn’t it be better if we just use the simple equation 2π/6.67(2(x)) and plug in the QB’s official ESPN QBR as the x variable?

  3. Wouldn’t it be better if we just use the simple equation 2π/6.67(2(x)) and plug in the QB’s official ESPN QBR as the x variable? Then we’d get it right everytime and there’d be no arguments about it.

  4. A few years back, some Raiders WR (maybe Louis Murphy, Denarius Moore or Jacoby Ford) caught a pass in the end zone with a defender draped all over him. The WR had control od the ball, got 2 feet down and then landed on his butt before the defender pulled an arm away and stripped the ball out. It was ruled incomplete. When you catch the ball in the end zone, there is no need to become a runner. The play should be over when you have 2 feet down with possession of the ball. I’d like to see that be the rule everywhere, but it at least should be the rule in the end zone

  5. Now that we got that out of the way. Let’s investigate each refs bank accounts on questionable calls. Let’s start with any deposit made into each account from a R. Kraft

  6. Calvin Johnson retires and they get rid of the Calvin Johnson rule……one has to wonder

  7. Determining what is a catch was never a problem until the nfl kept adding language to the rule. We’ve all played this game from childhood and everyone knows what is or isn’t a catch, especially with the benefit of replay

  8. What about when a player makes a diving catch or is sliding on his knees and is touched down. If he never became a runner does that make it no catch. If it does then the Odell Beckham one handed catch is no longer a catch he was never a runner.

  9. “Anything that makes it more likely that the Dez catch would be ruled a catch is a good thing, although it would have been terrible to be deprived of that historic meltdown choke job the next week against Seattle.”

    You mean wide left?? Enjoy another spectacular season with your choker, I mean kicker Blair.

  10. superpatriotsfan says:
    Jul 8, 2016 11:27 AM

    Now that we got that out of the way. Let’s investigate each refs bank accounts on questionable calls. Let’s start with any deposit made into each account from a R. Kraft
    —–

    if Kraft was going to deposit money in a refs bank account, I doubt he’d use one with his name on it.

    If you’re going to troll….at least TRY to use some common sense.

  11. For 90 years everyone knew an NFL catch when they saw one. Then the gang that can’t shoot straight took over at 345 Park Ave and since then no one knows what a catch is anymore.
    Think about that for a minute.

  12. As others have mentioned above. Most NFL fans grew up with the same definition – two feet down with full control of the ball.
    If the player doesn’t get two feet down before hitting the ground, then, and, ONLY then, must he maintain control when landing.
    Everything else the NFL is doing is just making it so complicated that no matter what the ruling on the field is, they can justify it.
    Keep it simple.

  13. They should retroactively apply the rule and strip away the Packers win. Dez so clearly caught that ball that it’s mind boggling that anyone could think otherwise…at least anyone with half a brain and working eyeballs.

  14. Now that we got that out of the way. Let’s investigate each refs bank accounts on questionable calls. Let’s start with any deposit made into each account from a R. Kraft
    _________________________________________

    Which questionable calls are you referring to? The ones where defenders hang all over Gronk and he gets called for OPI? Or the two HUGE calls towards the end of the regular season Denver game last year where Gronk was called for ticky tack OPI and Chung was called for holding in the end zone on an even worse call? The Pats stopped getting calls years ago when all the other teams were sick and tired of getting beat.

  15. If the receiver gets both feet down and he hits the ground and the ball doesn’t, it’s a catch.

  16. aypeeswhippingstick says:
    Jul 8, 2016 11:50 AM

    “Anything that makes it more likely that the Dez catch would be ruled a catch is a good thing, although it would have been terrible to be deprived of that historic meltdown choke job the next week against Seattle.”

    You mean wide left?? Enjoy another spectacular season with your choker, I mean kicker Blair.
    ________

    One guy missing a kick is bad. When the whole team suffers an epic collapse by blowing a 12-point lead with 5 minutes left, that is a historic meltdown.

  17. Same as the NBA, the league needed and wanted green bay and aaron rodgers to advance to that it was it boiled down to. The ” choker” Romo was horrible by the way 20-22 , 2 td’s and a 148 qb rating. Sttoges on this site with zero football iq’s are hilarious

  18. superpatriotsfan says:
    Jul 8, 2016 11:27 AM
    Now that we got that out of the way. Let’s investigate each refs bank accounts on questionable calls. Let’s start with any deposit made into each account from a R. Kraft
    ——————————–
    So what questionable call has gone the Pats way? Before you mention the tuck rule, let it be known that that was a terrible rule but it WAS correctly enforced in the game. The truth is that the League itself despises the Pats for being dominant in a parody driven league and they frequently have to beat the other team as well as the one-sided refs in many of their games played. Very rarely are the Pats the beneficiaries of questionable calls.

  19. Absolutely was a catch…as it was ruled on the field…but then someone in NY said no catch even tho there was no undisputed evidence that we all saw that there was no catch…oh wait I forgot that NY office gave one to the boys the week earlier so they gotta take one back
    Does that sound bout right?

  20. I really think the NFL should rely on a randomized yet qualified group of fans to come up with suggested changes to the rule book and then the NFL can strike/accept/amend them. Simplify, simplify.

    I’ll start: Rule #1 (just for 2016) – No more than 40,000 Packers fans are allowed to attend US Bank Stadium the 2nd week of the 2016 NFL season. You’re welcome, Vikings fans!

  21. The Cowboys should not even been in that game. Cowboy fans forget that the Lions got robbed the week before. You don’t hear Lions fans crying about that for years. There are Cowboy fans that haven’t been born yet, that will whine about Dez’s catch.

  22. The phrasing quoted, to do with having enough time to evade, ward off, whatever, is worse than before. Technically it allows someone to have not made a catch if he lands with control but is immediately knocked out of bounds, even if he maintains control of the ball, because he didn’t, really, have time to become a runner. Oops.

  23. I dont understand why they are trying to make this so hard.

    Its actually very simple. ball in hands 2 feet down = catch.

    ball comes out at any time after that = fumble.

    ball touchs ground at any time = no catch

    ball in hands 2 feet down player goes to the ground ball comes out = fumble

    ball in hands 2 feet down player gets rocked ball flys out = fumble

  24. In Teddy We Trust says:
    Jul 8, 2016 12:43 PM
    aypeeswhippingstick says:
    Jul 8, 2016 11:50 AM

    “Anything that makes it more likely that the Dez catch would be ruled a catch is a good thing, although it would have been terrible to be deprived of that historic meltdown choke job the next week against Seattle.”

    You mean wide left?? Enjoy another spectacular season with your choker, I mean kicker Blair.
    ________

    One guy missing a kick is bad. When the whole team suffers an epic collapse by blowing a 12-point lead with 5 minutes left, that is a historic meltdown.

    Thank you for the clarification Teddy. I would consider yourself as a Viking fan a definitive expert on historic meltdowns. For example, back in 2001 your club suffered one of their “best” historic meltdowns, 41-0 in the NFC championship game to the NY Giants. I still remember the classic picture of the punk Randy Moss and his QB counterpart Culpepper chilling on the sideline during the latter stages of that beautiful beat down.

  25. I just replayed Calvin Johnson’s catch against the Bears. This new “clarification” was carefully worded to avoid overturning that very bad call.

    If you have the ball in your hands when butt hits the ground, it’s a catch. You don’t have to become a runner or do anything else. You caught the ball.

  26. This rule makes the Lee Evans catch in the end zone in 20012 a TD and Ravens go to that Superbowl too.

  27. I am a huge Cowboys fan and was devastated by the Dez ruling. However, I, unlike so many, moved on about 2 days afterwards. All it took was a look at what happened in the second half before that moment and after. Dallas couldn’t stop one legged 12 the entire second half. Even if Dez play stayed a catch and a TD ensued, I believe that Aaron would have drove it and scored with like 10 seconds left to devastate even more.

  28. Isn’t this going to make it more likely that instead of an incomplete pass, it is going to be complete & then fumbled, leading to more turnovers?

    If a receiver has a greater chance to fumble the ball, will that make the teams more conservative in play selection, perhaps only going in the air when desperate or with an obvious mismatch?

    Will a run 1st, 2nd & 3rd offense make the NFL more interesting to watch?

  29. ngatasteelersfan says:
    Jul 8, 2016 3:22 PM

    This rule makes the Lee Evans catch in the end zone in 20012 a TD and Ravens go to that Superbowl too.
    ————————–

    Football probably won’t still be around at that point.

  30. drunkraider says:
    Jul 8, 2016 2:48 PM

    I dont understand why they are trying to make this so hard.

    Its actually very simple. ball in hands 2 feet down = catch.

    ball comes out at any time after that = fumble.

    ball touchs ground at any time = no catch

    ball in hands 2 feet down player goes to the ground ball comes out = fumble

    ball in hands 2 feet down player gets rocked ball flys out = fumble

    ———-

    that’s too simple. What would Dean Blandino do for the rest of the week if all the rules were that simple?

  31. Des caught it…

    Larry caught it…

    Calvin caught it…

    Put a 3rd grader out there and all 3 of these are catches…

    But…

    We have “trained” professionals…….

    When did this so hard ???

  32. cribbage12 says:
    Jul 8, 2016 1:09 PM

    I’ll start: Rule #1 (just for 2016) – No more than 40,000 Packers fans are allowed to attend US Bank Stadium the 2nd week of the 2016 NFL season. You’re welcome, Vikings fans!
    ______________

    Rule #2 (forever and retroactively) – No more than 40% of the state of Wisconsin is allowed to move/stay in Minnesota for jobs, culture and/or a better way of life.

    Rule #3 (forever) – All packer fans must breathe into a breathalyzer to gain access to any non-lameblow stadium.

    Rule #4 (forever) – All packer fans will be required to receive and page through a proper bathroom etiquette pamphlet (pictures only to negate later claims of ignorance) upon entry into any non-lameblow stadium.

  33. More pandering to the fantasy football geeks to keep them coming to the daily fantasy sites.

    The league makes billions off its regular operations every year.

    Now they make billions more of hidden income from their shadow ownership of the daily fantasy sites.

    Yet these disgustingly greedy billionaires are still trying to extort billion dollar buildings all over the country from the chumps I mean taxpayers.

    I hope no city or state ever gives the league a single dime again. Make the scumbag owners pay for their own buildings. Kraft did. Now Kroenke is for the Rams. Let them all cough up if they want shiny new sports palaces.

  34. At the exact moment the Dez play was re-played on the EDS, I knew it would be ruled “no-catch.”

    You know how I knew? Because it has never been a catch, that’s why. Why change it on that one day for that one player? Oh sure, it would’ve been nice for Dallas if it were. But it wasn’t.

  35. In Teddy We Trust says:
    Jul 8, 2016 11:09 AM
    Anything that makes it more likely that the Dez catch would be ruled a catch is a good thing, although it would have been terrible to be deprived of that historic meltdown choke job the next week against Seattle.
    ///////////////////////////////////////////

    Losing a tough road game in overtime as an underdog nobody picked and in a championship sucks.

    But going Wide Left for a postseason record-holding one-and-done for the 14th time in the history of the NFL…..

    ……let’s stop for a second……

    You read it right. The Vikings have gone one and done FOURTEEN TIMES. Clearly one-half of their record-holding TWENTY-EIGHT postseason losses indicates they probably had no right being there……including last year.

  36. How many times do we have to say it – even if the catch would have been given, Dallas hadn’t stopped GB the ENTIRE 2nd half! As a matter of fact, GB had to kneel on the ball at Dallas’ 30 yard line after moving the ball at will in the last 4 minutes.

    Even IF Dallas had scored a TD (which was not assured btw), GB had 3 minutes left to get a simple field goal.

    Unlike Minniesoda, GB actually has a good kicker. GB would have won the game anyway.

  37. By this definition, Dez’s catch still would have been ruled incomplete. His momentum clearly would have never let him avoid contact. Even that third or fourth step where he made a trivial lunge for the goal line, there is absolutely no way he could have avoided contact if someone had the angle and was going for him.

  38. The official on the field ruled Dez’s catch a catch. Under the appropriate review standard THAT should have been the ruling. Blandino screwed it up and we fans know it.

    Just like the NFL to spend 2 years obfuscating and then come around with a clarification like this.

  39. DEZ BRYANT DID NOT CATCH THE BALL, PERIOD;

    if you’re going to the ground, it doesn’t matter if you have ten feet down, once you hit the ground and the ball comes out, that’s it and that’s all–INCOMPLETE PASS;

    this rule was changed for the NFL ‘s showcase teams in general and good but most certainly not great players like Bryant in particular, in the hope to somehow elevate them to the level of a Calvin Johnson;

    this is how comedic the BUSINESS that is the NFL have become, totally and completely divorced and eradicated from the game it once was;

    this is why the same teams keep appearing in the playoffs almost every year–Denver, Dallas, Green Bay, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, New England–benefitting from ridiculously easy scheduling, questionable calls at critical times (the totally deplorable Michigan Mulligan last season to get GB into the playoffs, the ridiculous non-interference call on the face-guarding LB in Dallas, the comical non-touchdown call when Manziel clearly broke the plane against Pittsburgh that got the Steelers into the playoff last season) despite the fact their team talent level is questionable and their defence is at best inconsistent;

    it’s become an outdoor indoor league of passing prima donnas where the running game only serves to let wide receivers catch their breath;

    the idea of maintaining possession & control through contact with the ground has gone completely by the board, along with contact with the ground by the ball not automatically disqualifying a catch;

    sorry, but that kind of playground WWE BS no longer interests me;

    clearly the rising popularity among female fans of both the NFL and WWE is no coincidence–why not lower the rules for both to the same level if it helps to create more theatre of the absurd?

  40. Sorry but the GB meltdown was waaaaaay worse than a missed FG. That was one fluke turn of bad luck. The Packers intercepted Wilson four (4!) times and had a two-score lead with possession in the waning minutes of the game. They blew a 16 point lead in the conference championship, setting a new record.

    Not sure why GB fans think they can fool anyone into thinking otherwise.

  41. Easier Catch Rule: three elements

    1. establish possession of the football
    2. maintain possession for at least one second
    3. during that time, establish position in field of play (standard two feet, or other body part) for a moment before going out of bounds or losing possession

    The moment all three of those conditions are met, it’s a catch. Simple, straightforward and makes everything we intuitively recognize as a catch be a catch.

    Refs just have to recognize possession, count one Mississippi , and identify sufficient contact with the field of play. Gets rid of all that wishy-washy ‘becoming a runner’ language which is completely unnecessary.

  42. aj66shanghai says:
    Jul 9, 2016 1:47 AM
    They blew a 16 point lead in the conference championship, setting a new record.
    //////////////////////////////////////

    Overcoming a sixteen point lead ranks #8 in NFL conference championship games. Not a record. Not close.

    And a Wide Left is not a one-time fluke. Not for the Vikings. Any other team, maybe, but not them. They are the consummate postseason loser, with more losses and more one-and-dones than anyone else.

    The Packers choked, but the Vikings eat it.

  43. Dez Bryant caught the football….

    This wasn’t a case of getting two feet down, this was the case of terrible interpretation of the poorly written riles.

    He caught the ball….TOOK 3 steps and had the ball come out as he attempted to stretch it for a touchdown, as it hit the ground.

    I LOATHE the Cowboys…..but I’m not dim enough to think the didn’t get mobbed.

    That play happens in Dallas….it’s a catch, everybody knows that.

  44. He comes to the ground and the ball makes contact with the ground and the ball pops loose. He did not maintain control through the catch. That has NEVER been a catch. Never.

    Anyone that thinks it was a catch is only, and I mean only, expressing a biased opinion. It was not a catch. Never was, never will be.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.