Jump to content

Featured Replies

comment_272762
22 minutes ago, Mike said:

If you look at it, he caught the ball with one foot on the ground. Pivots, plants the other foot, gets blown up and loses the ball. If that's a catch on the sidelines and the same thing happens, but the ball goes out of bounds, that's ruled an incomplete pass every single time.

He didn't take a step, he didn't make a football move. Should've been ruled incomplete.

 

They don't use steps or football moves as criteria as a catch as long as he has possession of the ball for moment of time he has caught it.

  • Replies 76
  • Views 5.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • WBBFanWest
    WBBFanWest

    Here's hoping its "soap and toothpaste" night!

  • I am betting on a hissy fit from Carter and a crazy player move by Jones. 

  • Taynted_Fayth
    Taynted_Fayth

    I definitely underestimated how good of a pick up that was by Ottawa signing Dionte Spencer this past offseason. That was a hell of a game by him

comment_272763
1 minute ago, Jpan85 said:

They don't use steps or football moves as criteria as a catch as long as he has possession of the ball for moment of time he has caught it.

What is possession, though?

Seriously. I'm not trying to be purposely difficult, I just don't look at that play and think initially that it was a catch.

So what rules apply when it's that close? Because to me, possession would be that he secured the ball and unless he tucked it (which he didn't) then I don't think he secured it. There has to be a rule beyond "it touched both hands at once with a foot on the ground" that determines this stuff, I just have no idea what it is.

comment_272767
3 minutes ago, Mike said:

Part 1: you're missing the second part of the equation, where you have to survive contact. If all you need to do is have one foot on the ground and possession of the ball for a millisecond for it to be ruled a catch, then there are a lot more catches in the CFL than what gets called.

Part 2: it's a different rule when there's contact, but I can't find the play to comment and I don't remember it.

Part 1: He didn't drop the ball because he went to the ground, which is where the survive contact comes into play. He caught the ball then lost it on the hit. The only question is did he have the ball long enough to be called a catch or not. I think he did. Obviously you don't.

Part 2: I'm talking about the play where the Stamps recovered the ball and took it to the end zone after Harris got hit while throwing. Originally called a fumble, overturned by the C'mon Center. Ball is clearly thrown backwards IMO.

comment_272768
Just now, TBURGESS said:

Part 1: He didn't drop the ball because he went to the ground, which is where the survive contact comes into play. He caught the ball then lost it on the hit. The only question is did he have the ball long enough to be called a catch or not. I think he did. Obviously you don't.

Part 2: I'm talking about the play where the Stamps recovered the ball and took it to the end zone after Harris got hit while throwing. Originally called a fumble, overturned by the C'mon Center. Ball is clearly thrown backwards IMO.

 

comment_272812
1 hour ago, Mike said:

Because he doesn't tuck it.

that's the way I saw it... to me it didn't look like he ever had complete possession... so a football move or step or whatever is irrelevant...

1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:

Player makes a catch by the sidelines. Only gets 1 foot down. Called a catch, every time. Same should hold true on the field. Player makes a catch. Gets one foot down. It's a catch. If he then gets blown up and fumbles, it's a fumble.

 

but in that same circumstance if he's getting hit out of bounds and drops the ball it would be considered an incomplete pass... not a fumble with the team getting possession where the ball went out... at least that's my interpretation...

comment_272855
3 hours ago, Gotmilt said:

if you're talking about the Lavoie one, he caught it, looked up, took a step and was creamed. If that was a bomber everyone here would have been calling for a fumble.

I wasn't basing my statement on any type of bias against Calgary or how I would perceive it if it were involving the Bombers.  I simply said, I'm not sure that was a catch and fumble.

He caught it and took a step, but I'm not sure he ever secured the ball.

comment_272856
1 minute ago, BomberBall said:

I wasn't basing my statement on any type of bias against Calgary or how I would perceive it if it were involving the Bombers.  I simply said, I'm not sure that was a catch and fumble.

He caught it and took a step, but I'm not sure he ever secured the ball.

you don't have to secure it, I think changing directions or taking a step with the ball in your hands should be enough.

comment_272862
2 minutes ago, Mike said:

I'm over this argument, but you definitely have to secure it otherwise, you could just say "hey it hit my hand, that's good enough"

How do you catch a ball without "securing" it.

if you catch it, you shouldn't have to put it under your arm then run 5 yards downfield before possession can occur, if the ball stops moving in your hands that should be possession imo. 

Edited by Gotmilt

Create an account or sign in to comment