Proposed catch rule uses objective and subjective language for critical element

Getty Images

For the critical third element of the revised catch rule, the NFL’s Competition Committee could have chosen an objective standard or a subjective standard. The Competition Committee has chosen both.

That’s the most important takeaway from the Wednesday tweet by NFL senior V.P. of officiating Al Riveron, who unveiled a three-part standard for the third element of the catch rule, which generally requires the player, after possessing the ball and getting two feet (or a body part) on the ground to perform a “football move.”

The Competition Committee’s proposal defines “football move” in three ways: (1) taking a third step; (2) reaching or extending the ball for the line-to-gain; or (3) having the ability to do either.

The first option is clearly objective; the player either takes a third step after catching the ball or he doesn’t. The second option is primarily objective — in most cases, it will be obvious when a player is reaching or extending the ball. The third option is inherently subjective, requiring officials to determine in real time whether the player could have taken a third step or reached/extended for the line-to-gain, if he’d wanted to.

That last component apparently was implemented to address situations where the player has no reason to take a third step or reach/extend the ball, such as when a catch happens in the end zone. Absent some sort of time element, a player who has the ball knocked out of his hands the instant he gets a second foot down in the end zone would be regarded as having caught the ball, even though most would viscerally react to that by saying, “No catch.” So the player who catches the ball in a situation where he doesn’t want or need to take a third step or reach/extend the ball needs to have the ball in his possession for some period of time before a catch becomes a catch.

The third option to the third element potentially complicates replay review, since Riveron in those cases won’t be simply looking at whether a third step was taken or the player reached/extended the ball but whether he could have done either. When replay reviews revolving application of the third option to the third element occur, it will be critical for Riveron to resist engaging in a frame-by-frame review of the play and to defer to the ruling made in real time that the player had the ability to take a third step or reach/extend.

This is, as a practical matter, the “know it when you see it” aspect of the rule, and the officials in real time are much better suited to know it when they see it than Riveron ever will be, especially if Riveron can’t overturn the ruling on the field absent indisputable visual evidence (or whatever the standard will be labeled) of an error.

Ultimately, the question of whether the NFL has fixed the catch rule depends on whether the replay standard is applied properly. If it is, then maybe the catch rule finally will have been fixed.

If, of course, at least 24 owners decide to adopt the Competition Committee’s proposal.

44 responses to “Proposed catch rule uses objective and subjective language for critical element

  1. This is pretty complicated – probably by design – but are we seriously going back to the “football move” language? I thought we all laughed about that and moved on five years ago. I feel like we’re going in the wrong direction here.

    Then again, it couldn’t be much worse than the last two years of catch/non-catch shenanigans.

  2. So, the NFL wishes to simplify the catch rule by breaking it into 3 steps, with the 3rd step having 3 steps of its own. Got it.

  3. what morons

    all because the pats had the rule upheld correctly, where the rule puts the onus on the entitled primadonna receiver to not be a moron, where it is clear and concise

    wow

    welcome to the collapse of goodell and the nfl

  4. What if the receiver had to do a pirouette? Im not sure they tried that.

    Too bad they cant pause in mid play because then they would be able to have a special ofgicial cone out to inspect him and give a signed statement confirming the catch before resuming action.

  5. I don’t think this is all Riveron’s fault. Isn’t some yokel named Yurk the replay expert? I remember Yurk was the one that changed the James play. How come we never hear about that moron?

  6. Why don’t we just wait and see how this rule will affect the Patriots and the first chance we get to stick it to them will be how the rule will be called from then on. The Already have changed the rule in the SuperBowl so let’s not change it again until they have a chance to make some more hay.

  7. I don’t understand why this is complicated.

    Catch and two feet down is a catch.

    Falling to the ground with control without the ball hitting the ground is a catch.

    That’s it.

  8. This “football move” thing always drives me nuts. Here’s my rule:

    Once a grasp established (bobbling doesn’t count), 2nd foot or one knee etc inbounds makes a catch. And if you’re diving/falling the ball can’t touch the ground (even when gripped because we can’t tell if ground helped maintain your posession). The one exception is when the catcher is being tackled during the catch the ball may touch ground after being grasped – but this ends progress. And in this and any other catch the ball cannot come loose after you hit ground or before ref deems play over.

  9. So….is the NFL going to hire attorneys to be the white caps so they know how to decifer this stuff?

  10. .
    the best part of the Dez whine is “I tried to reach over the goal line” when he clearly NEVER tried to reach over anything because he fell straight onto his face while bobbling it. the ball hit the ground NO CATCH. this rule doesnt apply to Dez he bobbled it and used the ground to cradle it.

  11. I think a good litmus test is to see if the new rule would have given absolute clarity (catch or no catch) to some of the more controversial rulings in recent years.

  12. What if a guy barely gets that second foot in bounds and falls? What if it’s a diving catch? How could he reach or take a third step? Is falling now a football move? What if a guy catches the ball while on his knees and gets hit and ball comes out. This is nuts. No third element or add controlling the ball to (not through) the ground and add control through initial hit.

  13. glad it so much less complicated. Can’t wait to see the 20 minute replay reviews to determine if someone could take another step. So under the new rule is lee evans drop in AFC championship for the ravens now a legal catch?

  14. Why is it that every single person watching the games can clearly tell it’s a catch including my half blind grandmother except the refs? The rule should be simple. All three refs watch the replay independently and vote. 2 out of 3 gets the call. It’s that simple.

  15. OK, so it’s three feet down or the ability to get a third foot down, unless they would rather extend the ball instead of getting the third footdown.

    Why don’t we define an incomplete – Ball not brought under the player’s control before it touches the ground, or before the player goes out of bounds. If control is simultaneous with the ball being dislodged by the ground or defender, it’s incomplete.

  16. The ground cannot cause an incomplete pass if a receiver has control and is in bounds – done. The same rule applies that the ground cannot cause a fumble. This is a simple fix that too many hands in the cookie jar.

  17. So, how many old incompletions would now be considered catches under the new rule but have the consensus be that they should not have been.

    All because a few players couldn’t remember to hold onto the ball to make sure it was a catch by the rules. Now you bring back the element of subjectivity so we’ll be arguing that officials are fixing games.

  18. The third option is added for one simple reason. Having “the ability” to stretch for the goal line or take a third step will allow replay officials to confirm or over rule calls as they see fit. The last thing the NFL wants to do is institute a new rule because the Patriots benefited last season and have them potentially benefit next season. This way the NFL can ensure that does not happen.

  19. What other type of move would a player, having just caught the ball, make? Scratch his groin? Autograph a jersey? Because even the act of trying to recover control of a bobbling ball is, technically, a football move.

  20. Proposal: possession with 2 feet down = catch. If you fall to the ground and lose the ball, it’s a fumble, not an incomplete pass. It would make the game a lot more exciting.

  21. The Competition Committee’s proposal defines “football move” in three ways: (1) taking a third step; (2) reaching or extending the ball for the line-to-gain; or (3) having the ability to do either.

    ===========

    Replace all this with “maintains possession for a count of 1”

    By default it makes no sense because you can stand there with the ball and it’s still a catch. The 3rd point makes no sense to me.

  22. p6one6 says: “Now you bring back the element of subjectivity so we’ll be arguing that officials are fixing games.”
    —————————————————————————————-

    Everyone agrees the way the rule is written defies logic and in fact causes even more arguments that the games are fixed. Defenses know the rule is broken and will continue to try to knock the ball out of the hands WELL after the play is over. I think they need to remove the word ”Control” out of the rules. A ball can still be caught without ever hitting the ground without ever having any good control over it. Who cares about control as long as it never hits the ground.

  23. I can’t figure out why they don’t just say two feet and possession. This isn’t the only rule they have brutalized… when I was growing up it you “play to the whistle”.. not you play to the whistle.. unless something happens that we don’t want to get wrong (a fumble) and then you can play hard after the whistle too. It is a joke. In the NBA they ruined the Dunk Contest.. in the NFL they just ruined basic objective rules.

  24. Who cares about control as long as it never hits the ground.
    *******************

    So, you’re cool with a guy sliding on his back going out of bounds bobbling a ball having it be called a catch when he finally secures it 15 feet out of bounds, as long as it didn’t touch the ground on the way there?

  25. The rule is fine as is, don’t touch it.

    Any rule that makes Dez or Jesse James’ catches hold up needs to be voted down.

    Why is it too much to ask for a receiver to hang onto the ball after the hit the ground, if they catch it in the air or while they’re falling down?

  26. Absent some sort of time element, a player who has the ball knocked out of his hands the instant he gets a second foot down in the end zone would be regarded as having caught the ball, even though most would viscerally react to that by saying, “No catch.”
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    What are you trying to say here? As you worded that, it is not a catch because “the instant he gets a second foot down” means it is impossible (from a time perspective) to attempt any other action in order to meet the third element. The ball arriving/dislodging in those bang-bang plays would all be incomplete. From an objective standpoint, there would be very few instances where catch/no catch could be reasonably argued. The problem will come when the league tries to “adjust a game” by attempting to enter into a vague viewpoint where none should exist.

  27. Well. There you have it. We can finally say with complete certainty that Dez DID NOT catch the ball based on the rules at the time. Because they had to change the rule to make it a catch.

  28. By 2020, NFL rookies will need two minicamps to get ready for the season: One to learn their playbook, and the other to learn the rulebook.

    #WTFisAcatch?

  29. BayAreaBrownsBacker says:
    March 22, 2018 at 11:20 am
    p6one6 says: “Now you bring back the element of subjectivity so we’ll be arguing that officials are fixing games.”
    —————————————————————————————-

    Everyone agrees the way the rule is written defies logic and in fact causes even more arguments that the games are fixed.

    No, not everyone agrees. If you think you have arguments now, well stick around. This is simply another field leveling attempt since NE went to yet another SB. What it now, every other year on average they get there despite every frame attempt and constant rule management to try to out think BB? Y

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.