Agreed. You must come down with the ball in possession with 2 feet to be a catch.
Well, the slowed version shows that after leaving the WR, it hits the RB in the hands, then falls to the ground.
And to me, it looks like his left is dragging, his right is down, then he steps again with his left right as the ball leaves him.
OK - ruling on the field was an incomplete pass.
I personally think it was caught, lateraled, fumbled, recovered, and scored.
It looked to me like only 1 foot down with possession
Going back to the video at 00:29 and 00:30 it looks like the ball hits his hands with one foot planted and the other foot dragging. The ball is in his outstretched hands, not pulled into his body. When he pulls in into his body, he only has 1 foot down and the other foot up. That’s when he laterals it.
So the issue is whether he had adequate “control” of the ball when it was in contact with his outstretched hands. Maybe the ref thought he didn’t establish enough control until the ball was pulled into his body. I don’t think there is any rule on that. If you catch a ball in your outstretched hands and never pull it into your body, but it stays in your hands, I would think that is sufficient control.
I’m inclined now to say, unless the ref saw some kind of bobbling of the ball while the two feet were down at the moment the ball hits his hands, it’s a legitimate catch and pitch (fumble).
But in the NCAA, don’t you only need one foot down or is it the NFL with the “one foot” rule?
I think NCAA is 1 foot. If that’s true, then there is little question that it’s a valid hook & lateral.
I was under the impression–though it’s been long enough since I’ve read the rules that I could be completely wrong–that possession is more subjective than “has the ball and has a foot/two feet on the ground”. “Control of the ball” is key, though, and AIUI, that means that the ball’s not bouncing, bobbling, etc., and the ball carrier is not flailing around trying to catch it, but has a secure grip on it and it’s not going anywhere unless he brings it there or someone else forces it out of his hands. The one foot/two foot distinction, IIUC, is about out-of-bounds calls: in college, one foot touching the ground inbounds (after gaining possession) is enough to consider you in, while in the NFL, both feet have to touch the ground inbounds (also after gaining possession). Separate from possession itself, but very closely related.
Again, I could be completely off base.
NFL Digest
So a catch = control plus ground contact
In this case, it looks like the player had control plus one or two feet down. Granted, the video is not clear if there was any bobbling. It looks like the player caught the ball then deliberately pitched it.
It’s not clear, but it sure looked like a bobble to me. Enough so that I would rule it incomplete and then require clear evidence to the contrary to overturn it.
I wonder if refs have a general rule that if a catch is questionable to favor one way or another by default. For example, if it’s too close to call, call it in favor of the offense… or the defense… or the home team… or the team that’s losing… or something like that.
We use NCAA rules for high school ball in Texas, where “A catch is an act of firmly establishing player possession of a live ball in flight.” (NCAA 2-2-7).
That’s it. Hideously subjective. Really, you can defend either catch/pitch or no catch on this play.
Remember that the official on this play did not know a hook-and-ladder was being run - an advantage you have so you’re looking at the play a bit differently than he did live. Live, he sees the ball flipped back and fall to the ground. He has to quickly make a decision, and
“e. When in question, the catch, recovery or interception is not completed.” (2-2-7-e)
I’d be blowing my whistle, too. The fact that you have to dissect the video in slow-mo and still can’t really be sure backs up that decision.
In these cases, it’s helpful to give the referees a little bit of “incentive” to nudge those close calls your way. This high school’s Athletic Director has a lot to learn.
Does anyone ever go up to the ref and say “Hey, dude, we’re gonna be running an unusual play, this is how it’s gonna work, this is what you have to look out for, etc.”?
Coaches will alert refs to very unusual plays that they may run so the officials don’t throw a penalty because the play looks funny. Or the coaches want to make sure what they are doing is legal.
They do, but in the pregame – not usually during the game, especially because you’d really only be able to get that message to one official; the other 4 still won’t be prepared.
So while the crew may have been notified in the pregame meeting, it probably wasn’t at the front of anyone’s mind in the waning seconds of the 4th quarter, 3 hours later.
Right.
The call had to be made in real time, and unfortunately, in my experience, Texas HS refs are on the “whistle first, ask questions later” plan, which messes up many things.
The play was whistled dead at the toss, and according to people at the game, the defense let up. Had it not been whistled dead, the zebras could have discussed what happened with time to think.
But, I’m still bitter about some calls from last year’s playoffs. Clear evidence that the refs were wrong. But we still couldn’t pull it out. Such is life.
Well, that does it. Incomplete.
I know we beat this one up already, but I did find the NCAA memo I was referencing.