Quote
Billy_T
Quote
moklerman
I agree but I don't think the Ertz play was an example of it. IMO, they got it right on that one. Ertz caught the ball, secured it, transferred it, made a football move and was a runner and it was not a continuation of the catch situation.
The Jesse James play was an example of what needs to be fixed.
What often drives me crazy is when a receiver catches the ball with two hands, transfers it to one hand and then isn't given a catch. If you have that much control over it, to me, it's a catch.
I can see that. But because they've made it a different situation, the confusion is always going to be there.
Just make it a matter of possession at the moment of breaking the plane, regardless of "runner versus receiver" and all other variations. And, again, on the sidelines, two feet in, with possession, at the moment of crossing the sidelines. Shouldn't matter if the receiver completes the entire process with perfection
after that moment. It shouldn't be scored by the judges on form, etc.
I think if you try to completely quantify it and define it is where you run into trouble. Since there's really no way to cover every scenario, they need to just let these guys make the calls as best they can and live with it. I think the officials are so confused and constrained by trying to be perfect that they've foregone common sense.
By the letter of the rule, the TD to the RB in the back of the end zone should have been called back. But in that particular moment, the guy making the catch, just the overall thing, I'm glad it stood. It would have been a shame to ticky-tack that one away. So, it seems like you let the game happen and try to go with common sense. Stopping everything any time there's any type of infraction isn't the answer.
