Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Team Discussions regarding games, players, coaches, or anything else related to Buccaneer Football.
post

Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby Bucs2theSB » Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:15 am

I'll admit I'm more of a casual fan, but something has always not made sense to me. When a receiver catches a ball in the endzone, and he loses possession of it, the play is ruled incomplete and not a touchdown.

Case in point:

Image

However, when a runner lunges for the goal-line, reaches the ball across, and loses the football in the process, it is still a touchdown and not a fumble. I have never seen these overturned.

Case in point:
Image
https://twitter.com/Panthers/status/927545775386714112

Now I am fully aware of the rule but that does not mean that the current rules are the best. In fact, it seems to favor runners.

Section 2 Touchdown

TOUCHDOWN PLAYS
Article 1 Touchdown Plays. A touchdown is scored when:

(a) the ball is on, above, or behind the plane of the opponents’ goal line and is in possession of a runner
who has advanced from the field of play; or

(b) a ball in possession of an airborne runner is on, above, or behind the plane of the goal line, and some
part of the ball passed over or inside the pylon; or

(c) a ball in player possession touches the pylon, provided that, after contact by an opponent, no part of
the player’s body, except his hands or feet, struck the ground before the ball touched the pylon; or

(d) any player who is legally inbounds catches or recovers a loose ball (3-2-3) that is on, above, or behind
the opponent’s goal line; or

(e) the Referee awards a touchdown to a team that has been denied one by a palpably unfair act.

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES
(1) The ball is automatically dead when it is in legal possession of a player and is on, above, or behind
the opponent’s goal line.

(2) the player is attempting to catch a pass, the ball is not dead, and a touchdown is not scored, until the
receiver completes the catch. See Rule 3, Section 2, Article 7.

A.R. 11.1 Third-and-goal on B2. Runner A1 goes to the goal line with the ball over the plane of the goal line. He is
tackled, fumbles, and the defensive team recovers in the end zone.
Ruling: Touchdown. The ball is automatically dead at the instant of legal player possession on the
opponent’s goal line.
A.R. 11.2 Second-and-10 on B18. Runner A1 takes handoff and runs down the sideline toward the goal line with the ball
in his outside arm. He crosses the goal line plane standing with the ball to the outside of the pylon.
Ruling: Touchdown. Part of the ball crossing over or inside the pylon only applies to an airborne runner who
lands out of bounds.


So why is one a touchdown and the other isn't? Year after year there is a catch overturned that is controversial and it seems that the NFL can't figure out how best to define them. Can anyone say "football move"? Many will remember the Burt Emmanuel ruling (though not in the endzone) and more recently the Dez Bryant non-catch. Almost every game, I see a player leap for the goal-line or the pylons with the ball coming out of their hands and those plays still get called touchdowns because of the way the rule is written.

Despite how the rules are written currently, does this make sense to anyone?

Thanks for your input.
Image
Bucs2theSB
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:56 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby Babeinbucland » Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:19 am

Wasn’t this posted somewhere else?
User avatar
Babeinbucland
 
Posts: 3854
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 9:24 pm
Has thanked: 102 times
Been thanked: 100 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby Bucs2theSB » Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:33 am

Babeinbucland wrote:Wasn’t this posted somewhere else?


Where?
Image
Bucs2theSB
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:56 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby DanTurksGhost » Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:42 am

The possession rule applies everywhere on the field, end zone included. The difference between a pass and a run is that when a ball is thrown, possession is given up in the time it leaves the QB's hands and until it becomes possessed again by the receiver. A RB has possession of the ball when he crosses the goal line. And yes, this was discussed not long ago.
User avatar
DanTurksGhost
 
Posts: 1050
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 44 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby Bucs2theSB » Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:54 am

DanTurksGhost wrote:The possession rule applies everywhere on the field, end zone included. The difference between a pass and a run is that when a ball is thrown, possession is given up in the time it leaves the QB's hands and until it becomes possessed again by the receiver. A RB has possession of the ball when he crosses the goal line. And yes, this was discussed not long ago.


While this is a perfectly good explanation, I think the controversy (Burt Emmanuel, Calvin Johnson, Dez Bryant) is around what the definition of possession is, especially during a catch.

I'd like to see what the game would look like if the rule was changed so that runners had to maintain possession after crossing the goal-line.
Image
Bucs2theSB
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:56 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby DanTurksGhost » Tue Nov 07, 2017 1:00 am

Bucs2theSB wrote:
DanTurksGhost wrote:I'd like to see what the game would look like if the rule was changed so that runners had to maintain possession after crossing the goal-line.


You'd see a lot of defenders just ripping the ball away from the runner. But that aside, exactly WHY should they have to maintain possession after crossing the goal line? Once the ball -- while being possessed by the player -- crosses the plane, the play is over. In the case of a reception, possession isn't yet established. In the case of a run, possession is established before.
User avatar
DanTurksGhost
 
Posts: 1050
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 44 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby Bucs2theSB » Tue Nov 07, 2017 1:09 am

DanTurksGhost wrote:
Bucs2theSB wrote:


You'd see a lot of defenders just ripping the ball away from the runner. But that aside, exactly WHY should they have to maintain possession after crossing the goal line? Once the ball -- while being possessed by the player -- crosses the plane, the play is over. In the case of a reception, possession isn't yet established. In the case of a run, possession is established before.


Why you ask? I'd say it'd normalize the rules to make them more consistent with each other and to make things interesting of course.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see this in the future.
Image
Bucs2theSB
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:56 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby DanTurksGhost » Tue Nov 07, 2017 1:13 am

The rules are not inconsistent. If a WR catches the ball at the one-foot line and then crosses the goal line, it is exactly the same. The difference is possession. A runner receiving a hand-off has possession. A WR doesn't until he controls the ball in the field of play.
User avatar
DanTurksGhost
 
Posts: 1050
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 44 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby Caradoc » Tue Nov 07, 2017 1:32 am

Bucs2theSB wrote:
DanTurksGhost wrote:
You'd see a lot of defenders just ripping the ball away from the runner. But that aside, exactly WHY should they have to maintain possession after crossing the goal line? Once the ball -- while being possessed by the player -- crosses the plane, the play is over. In the case of a reception, possession isn't yet established. In the case of a run, possession is established before.


Why you ask? I'd say it'd normalize the rules to make them more consistent with each other and to make things interesting of course.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see this in the future.


The inconsistency there is in your imagination.

A player running the ball has established possession. Therefore once the ball crosses the plane it's a TD

In your example of a reception, possession has never been established, which is why it doesn't count

If the WR catches a ball at the one, establishes possession, and then does exactly like the runner did, it is a TD as possession is established.

Once again, while there are many confusing aspects of NFL rules, this is not one of those instances and any confusion is on your part.
Caradoc
 
Posts: 3097
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:30 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby Bucs2theSB » Wed Nov 08, 2017 6:36 am

Caradoc wrote:
Bucs2theSB wrote:
Why you ask? I'd say it'd normalize the rules to make them more consistent with each other and to make things interesting of course.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see this in the future.


The inconsistency there is in your imagination.

A player running the ball has established possession. Therefore once the ball crosses the plane it's a TD

In your example of a reception, possession has never been established, which is why it doesn't count

If the WR catches a ball at the one, establishes possession, and then does exactly like the runner did, it is a TD as possession is established.

Once again, while there are many confusing aspects of NFL rules, this is not one of those instances and any confusion is on your part.


I suppose then it would come down to whether you agree to the call made after this play:

Image

Was possession established there?

I suppose it would depend on your interpretation of the rule with that play

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.
Image
Bucs2theSB
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:56 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby mdb1958 » Wed Nov 08, 2017 7:42 am

I would say the NFL messed up many good catches in order to thwart the few they couldnt have a good answer for. Its obvious the maintain rule does this. They use the sideline and the endzone for extreme (according to the rules) rulings instead of using human judgement which more times than not would be correct. Of course lots of times I witnessed what I would consider bias by the officials which started all this politically correct bullshit to begin with.
mdb1958
 
Posts: 6784
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 132 times
Been thanked: 64 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby Deuce » Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:01 am

Babeinbucland wrote:Wasn’t this posted somewhere else?


I actually posted a similar thread to this recently.

First off, don't listen to the people here. DTG was pretty hard against my ideas, too. I know and understand the NFL rules, they're just convoluted to the point where they don't actually make sense. Try to explain it to someone who has never watched football before.

In your scenario, I get that a possessed ball crossing the goal line is a touchdown. Where most of the confusion comes in is with the catch rule. Your provided gifs show two plays that should have been called catches and were not (iirc).
User avatar
Deuce
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:23 pm
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 13 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby DanTurksGhost » Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:51 am

mdb1958 wrote:I would say the NFL messed up many good catches in order to thwart the few they couldnt have a good answer for. Its obvious the maintain rule does this. They use the sideline and the endzone for extreme (according to the rules) rulings instead of using human judgement which more times than not would be correct. Of course lots of times I witnessed what I would consider bias by the officials which started all this politically correct bullshit to begin with.


Yup. This is why you cannot criticize the officials. They'll tell you directly to your face, sometimes, things like "you're not going to get that call, so cut it out". Or at least they used to.
User avatar
DanTurksGhost
 
Posts: 1050
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 44 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby Caradoc » Wed Nov 08, 2017 6:47 pm

Deuce wrote:
Babeinbucland wrote:Wasn’t this posted somewhere else?


I actually posted a similar thread to this recently.

First off, don't listen to the people here. DTG was pretty hard against my ideas, too. I know and understand the NFL rules, they're just convoluted to the point where they don't actually make sense. Try to explain it to someone who has never watched football before.

In your scenario, I get that a possessed ball crossing the goal line is a touchdown. Where most of the confusion comes in is with the catch rule. Your provided gifs show two plays that should have been called catches and were not (iirc).


Both of those gifs were very clearly not catches according to the rules today. You can argue the rules should be changed, but there is nothing unclear about whether or not those are catches according to the rules.
Caradoc
 
Posts: 3097
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:30 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: Controversey around catches vs. runs in the endzone

Postby mdb1958 » Sun Nov 12, 2017 5:47 am

Caradoc wrote:
Deuce wrote:
I actually posted a similar thread to this recently.

First off, don't listen to the people here. DTG was pretty hard against my ideas, too. I know and understand the NFL rules, they're just convoluted to the point where they don't actually make sense. Try to explain it to someone who has never watched football before.

In your scenario, I get that a possessed ball crossing the goal line is a touchdown. Where most of the confusion comes in is with the catch rule. Your provided gifs show two plays that should have been called catches and were not (iirc).


Both of those gifs were very clearly not catches according to the rules today. You can argue the rules should be changed, but there is nothing unclear about whether or not those are catches according to the rules.


The controversy is because the rules were changed. They both were catches. According to the rules Johnson could have spun around five more times but when he slapped the ball on the ground to get up -- incomplete? Yeah right.

Bryant? In an attempt to reach the goal line he was down by contact.
They should enact an overiding judgement call because I think when the rule change was made it was to resolve the catch to the ground to close to call judgements. Or should I say diving catches where possession wasnt maintained.

My opinion is they eliminated chances of some weird ruling for a completed catch and by doing so they eliminated many obvious catches and turned things into plain stupidity. (nothing unclear)

The way the rules are now a player could tap the ball in the air from the right side of the endzone 17 times all the way to the left side of the endzone, feigned a heart attack and dropped the ball to clutch his chest and they could call it an in completion.
mdb1958
 
Posts: 6784
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 132 times
Been thanked: 64 times


post

Return to Team Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: .irishHITMAN4rent, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 13 guests